BRUSOV STATE UNIVERSITY

REVIEW PAPER
Stylistic Devices and Expressive Means in the movie
"Divergent" (1,2,3) and Their Armenian Translation

Faculty: The Faculty of Translation

Year: 4th
Group: 5th
Students: Karina Galstyan, Arevik Stepanyan
Subject: Stylistics
Lecturer: Anna Avetisyan

Yerevan 2025
1. Contents
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .2
2. Chapter 1: General Notes on Stylistic Devices and Expressive Means. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Chapter 2: Stylistic Analysis of the Movie “Divergent (1,2,3)” . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.1 Phonetic Stylistic Devices and Expressive Means
3.2 Lexical Stylistic Devices and Expressive Means
3.3 Syntactical Stylistic Devices and Expressive Means
3.4 Quantitative Data Presentation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4. Conclusion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5. References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

INTRODUCTION
The evolution of modern cinema has fundamentally transformed the way human beings
use language to convey meaning, emotion, and political ideology. Film discourse is no
longer understood as just a script or a collection of spoken words; it has become a
sophisticated, multimodal system where verbal language interacts with visual and
auditory elements to create a powerful communicative experience. In the world of
dystopian cinema, language is never a neutral tool. It is an instrument used to build
social structures, define identities, and express the deep-seated conflicts between
authority and the individual. The way a character speaks, the slogans a society adopts,
and the metaphors used to describe "the other" all serve to create a world that feels
both alien and uncomfortably familiar.

The Divergent film trilogy, consisting of Divergent, Insurgent, and Allegiant, offers a rich
landscape for this type of linguistic investigation. Set in a post-apocalyptic society where
people are divided into five rigid factions, the trilogy presents a world where your
language is your identity. Through the use of dialogue, voice-over narration, and
symbolic manifestos, the films employ a wide range of stylistic devices to intensify the
emotional impact on the audience and emphasize the sharp ideological contrasts
between the characters.

The importance of this research lies in the growing academic interest in how film
discourse operates as a form of global communication. While the original English scripts
provide the primary stylistic foundation, the translation of these films into other
languages, such as Armenian, introduces a fascinating layer of cross-cultural and cross-
linguistic analysis. Studying how the stylistic nuances of a Western dystopian narrative
are preserved or adapted in the Armenian language allows for a deeper understanding
of contrastive stylistics. This is particularly relevant in the modern era, where cinematic
stories are consumed globally, making the analysis of how expressive means travel
between different linguistic systems a vital part of contemporary linguistics.

The primary aim of this paper is to review and analyze the stylistic devices and
expressive means found within the English and Armenian versions of the Divergent film
trilogy. By examining these two languages side-by-side, the study seeks to identify the
specific similarities and differences in how linguistic tools are used to shape meaning
and create an emotional effect. This comparison reveals how different phonetic and
grammatical systems manage the "dystopian register" a style of speaking that must
sound both authoritative and high-stakes. The research intends to show how the original
stylistic intent of the filmmakers is mirrored or modified when it encounters the unique
morphological and cultural structures of the Armenian language.

To achieve this goal, several objectives must be met. First, it is necessary to identify the
phonetic, lexical, and syntactic stylistic devices that characterize the original English
dialogue. Second, the study must examine the Armenian translations of these texts to
see how those devices are rendered for a different audience. Third, the research will
analyze the expressive means used to portray character growth and the larger
ideological battles of the plot. Finally, the study will provide a quantitative look at the
frequency of these devices to see if certain linguistic patterns are more dominant in one
language than the other. The research material for this study is drawn from the most
significant dialogues, monologues, and narrative segments of all three films, providing a
comprehensive corpus for stylistic comparison.

The structure of this review paper is designed to move logically from theoretical
concepts to practical, data-driven analysis. The paper is organized into an introduction,
two main chapters, and a conclusion. The introduction serves to define the aim of the
work, explain why the topic is significant in today’s linguistic landscape, and outline the
methodology used for the research. It sets the stage for the deeper inquiry that follows
by establishing the connection between film, language, and the dystopian genre.

Chapter 1 focuses on the theoretical foundations of the topic. It introduces the

classification of stylistic devices and expressive means, explaining how they function at
various levels of language. This chapter clarifies what we mean by phonetic devices like
alliteration, lexical devices like metaphors and epithets, and syntactic devices like
parallelism and rhetorical questions. By establishing this theoretical framework, the first
chapter provides the necessary definitions that will be used to analyze the cinematic
discourse of the trilogy.

Chapter 2 moves into the core analysis of the research. It provides a detailed look at the
English and Armenian texts of the Divergent films, illustrating how specific stylistic
devices are used in practice. This chapter is not purely descriptive; it also presents
quantitative data to show the distribution and frequency of these linguistic features
across the three films. By comparing the original English lines with their Armenian
equivalents, this section highlights where the languages align and where they diverge in
their search for expressive power.

The conclusion summarizes the main findings of the research. It brings together the
theoretical and practical threads of the paper to offer a final perspective on how
language reinforces the themes of identity and control in the Divergent universe.
Ultimately, this study emphasizes that whether in English or Armenian, the stylistic
choices made in film are essential for transforming a simple story into a powerful
ideological statement.

Chapter 1: General Notes on Stylistic Devices and Expressive Means

The study of language within cinematic discourse requires a specialized approach that
considers both the spoken word and the context in which it is delivered. In linguistics,
specifically within the branch of stylistics, there is a fundamental distinction between
expressive means and stylistic devices. While they both serve to make language more
vivid, they work in different ways and serve different purposes in the communication
process. In the Divergent film trilogy, this distinction becomes a vital tool for
understanding how a dystopian society is constructed and how the protagonist’s journey
from conformity to rebellion is linguistically mapped.

The Nature of Expressive Means and Stylistic Devices

The Divergent film trilogy represents a narrative in which language plays a crucial role in
shaping ideological conflict and character identity. Expressive means are the inherent
tools within a language system that provide emphasis or emotional depth. These are not
invented by a writer for a specific aesthetic effect; rather, they are part of the natural
fabric of the language that we use to show how we feel. These include phonetic
features like pitch and melody, morphological features like the use of diminutive
suffixes, and syntactic features like the omission of words in moments of high stress.

In the context of the Divergent films, expressive means often appear in the way
characters react to immediate danger. A character shouting a short, one-word
command is using a syntactic expressive mean, such as an elliptical sentence, to
convey urgency. These are natural linguistic reactions to the high-stakes environment of
a dystopian world where characters must communicate quickly under pressure. This
"natural" emphasis helps the audience feel the visceral reality of the characters' fear.

Stylistic devices, on the other hand, are more intentional and creative. They occur when
a speaker or writer consciously replaces a standard way of speaking with something
more complex to achieve a specific communicative goal. Stylistic devices in the trilogy
function through the interaction of two meanings: the primary, literal meaning
established within the language system, and the contextual or figurative meaning
imposed by the cinematic context. These choices operate not only through verbal
language but also through the deliberate rhythm and repetition of dialogue meant to
indoctrinate or inspire.

1. Phonetic Stylistic Devices and Expressive Means

Phonetic stylistic devices contribute to the emotional atmosphere of the films by shaping
the sound and rhythm of speech. Because cinema is an auditory medium, the way
words sound—their "music"—is just as important as what they mean.

Alliteration is the repetition of initial consonant sounds in neighboring words, creating

emphasis and making phrases more memorable. For example, in the central slogan
"Faction before blood," the repetition of the initial "b" sound reinforces the rigidity and
absolutism of the faction ideology. This phonetic choice makes the rule sound like a
natural law rather than a man-made restriction.

Assonance, the repetition of vowel sounds within words, creates a sense of internal
rhythm and emotional resonance. In the line "I am selfish. I am brave," the repeated
vowel sounds add a sense of balance to the sentence. This reinforces Tris’s internal
conflict, as the phonetic harmony of the sentence contrasts with the chaotic struggle she
feels inside as she tries to define her identity.

Intonation plays a vital role in conveying power dynamics. In the Divergent universe,
commands delivered by faction leaders like Jeanine Matthews often use falling
intonation, which emphasizes absolute control and dominance. In contrast, the rising
intonation often heard in Tris’s speech in the first film reflects her initial uncertainty and
her growing resistance to the status quo.

2. Lexical Stylistic Devices and Expressive Means

Lexical stylistic devices focus on word choice and the layers of meaning attached to
them. In a dystopian society, the state often "rebrands" reality through specific lexical
choices to maintain order.

Metaphor and symbolism are perhaps the most prominent lexical tools in the trilogy. A
metaphor allows one concept to be understood in terms of another. The entire faction
system serves as a grand metaphor for social categorization and the loss of individual
fluidity. Symbolism involves using physical objects to represent abstract ideas, such as
the "fear landscape," which is not just a digital simulation but a symbol of the
protagonist's psychological struggle and her confrontation with personal weakness.

Epithets are descriptive labels used to categorize and often dehumanize people. When
characters call the Abnegation faction "Stiffs," they are using a derogatory epithet that
summarizes an entire group as rigid and lifeless. This shows how language is used to
build walls between social classes. Hyperbole, or deliberate exaggeration, is used by
the authorities to describe the "catastrophic" consequences of being Divergent. By
using such extreme language, the regime uses fear to ensure that the population
remains compliant.

Antithesis highlights the sharp contrast between opposing ideas, such as the conflict
between "Divergent" and "faction-bound." This lexical opposition emphasizes the theme
of freedom versus control. Furthermore, irony is frequently used to highlight the
hypocrisy of the state; the society claims to promote peace and harmony, yet its
vocabulary is filled with terms related to surveillance, punishment, and elimination.

3. Syntactic Stylistic Devices and Expressive Means

Syntactic devices deal with the arrangement of words and the structure of sentences.
These structures determine the "tempo" of the dialogue and the perceived authority of
the speaker.

Repetition and parallelism are essential for the indoctrination seen in the films.
Repetition reinforces key ideological messages, such as the constant recitation of
faction mottos. Parallelism—using the same grammatical structure in a series of
sentences—creates a sense of strength. When Tris says, "I chose Dauntless. I chose
bravery," the parallel structure emphasizes her personal agency. It turns a simple
statement of fact into a declaration of identity.

Rhetorical questions are used to challenge the listener or express deep internal doubt.
The question "Why can’t I be more than one thing?" is not looking for a literal answer; it
is a rhetorical tool that reflects the central ideological conflict of the entire trilogy. It
invites the audience to question the logic of the world alongside the protagonist.

Short sentences and juxtaposition are used to heighten tension. In action sequences,
the dialogue often shifts to staccato, short sentences like "Run. Hide. Don’t look back."
This syntactic compression mirrors the physical heart rate of the characters.
Juxtaposition, placing contrasting ideas or scenes side by side, is used to enhance
emotional shock, such as when a calm, ritualistic speech is followed by an act of
sudden, brutal violence.

Conclusion of Chapter 1

In summary, the Divergent trilogy utilizes a sophisticated array of phonetic, lexical, and
syntactic stylistic devices to construct its dystopian reality. These linguistic choices do
more than just tell a story; they build a world where language is a weapon of the state
and a shield for the rebel. By understanding these devices in their original English
context, we gain a clear view of how the films intend to manipulate the audience’s
emotions and perceptions.

This theoretical foundation is necessary for the next stage of our research. When we
move into the comparative analysis of these devices in Armenian, we will see how these
layers of meaning are adapted. Armenian, as a morphologically rich language with a
different history of "authority" in its speech patterns, offers a unique lens through which
to view these stylistic choices. The following chapter will use the categories established
here to perform a detailed, quantitative, and qualitative analysis of how the Divergent
trilogy speaks to its audience across linguistic borders.
 Chapter 2: Stylistic Analysis of the Movie “Divergent (1,2,3)”
This chapter reviews and analyzes the stylistic devices and expressive means identified
in selected excerpts from the English scripts of the Divergent film trilogy and their
Armenian translations. The analysis is organized according to phonetic, lexical, and
syntactical stylistic devices. Each subsection summarizes existing observations,
provides illustrative examples in both languages, evaluates their stylistic function, and
compares their frequency through quantitative data.
2.1 Phonetic Stylistic Devices and Expressive Means

1. Repetition / Rhythm:
English: “Faction before blood. / Faction before blood.”
Armenian: «Խմբակցությունը՝ արյունից վեր։ Խմբակցությունը՝ արյունից
վեր»
Analysis:
The repetition turns the phrase into a chant, reinforcing ideological loyalty and emotional
pressure. The balanced rhythm and stressed key words give the slogan a ritualistic quality. In
Armenian, the repetition is preserved, and the phrase functions as a moral command rather than a
personal choice, maintaining the same persuasive force.

2. Rhythmic interrogative repetition:

English: “Am I smart? Kind? Am I honest? Selfless? Or brave?”
Armenian: «Ես խելա՞ցի եմ։ Բարի՞։ Արդա՞ր եմ։ Անշահա՞խնդիր։ Թե՞ քաջ»
Analysis:
The short, fragmented questions create a rapid rhythm that reflects the character’s inner turmoil.
The lack of full sentences intensifies emotional tension. The Armenian translation keeps the
same interrogative fragmentation, allowing the psychological conflict to remain equally
expressive.

3. Imperative commands:
English: “Choose. Now. Before it’s too late.”
Armenian: «Ընտրիր։ Հիմա։ Քանի դեռ ուշ չէ»
Analysis:
The sharp, monosyllabic imperatives produce urgency and pressure through abrupt intonation.
Armenian retains the clipped structure and strong stress, preserving the threatening and coercive
tone of the original.

2.2 Lexical Stylistic Devices and Expressive Means

1. Metaphor:
English: “The faction system is a living being… composed of cells.”
Armenian: «Խմբակցությունների համակարգը կենդանի օրգանիզմ է՝
կազմված բջիջներից»
Analysis:
This metaphor equates society with a biological organism, suggesting that individuals are merely
functional parts of a larger system. The Armenian version fully preserves the metaphorical
image, reinforcing the idea of collective dominance over individuality.
2. Ideological evaluative vocabulary:
English: “Peace,” “harmony,” “order,” “rightful place.”
Armenian: «խաղաղություն», «համերաշխություն», «կարգ», «իրավական
տեղ»
Analysis:
These abstract nouns create an elevated ideological discourse used to justify control and
conformity. Armenian equivalents maintain the formal register, ensuring the political and moral
authority of the speech remains intact.

3. Labeling / Social stereotyping:

English: “The others all call us ‘stiffs.’”
Armenian: «Մյուսները մեզ անվանում են «փայտացածներ»»
Analysis:
The label functions as a lexical tool of social exclusion, reducing identity to stereotype. The
Armenian translation preserves the derogatory tone, maintaining the social tension between
factions.

2.3 Syntactical Stylistic Devices and Expressive Means

1. Parallelism:
English: “They’re our protectors, our soldiers, our police.”
Armenian: «Նրանք մեր պաշտպաններն են, մեր զինվորները, մեր
ոստիկանները»
Analysis:
The parallel structure emphasizes role and function, creating a sense of order and authority.
Armenian mirrors the syntactic balance, preserving the rhythm and clarity of the enumeration.

2. Ellipsis:
English: “Except for me.”
Armenian: «Բացի ինձնից»
Analysis:
The incomplete sentence isolates the speaker emotionally and psychologically. Armenian keeps
the elliptical structure, reinforcing the sense of alienation.

3. Rhetorical question:
English: “What if you don’t jump?”
Armenian: «Իսկ եթե չցատկե՞ս»
Analysis:
This rhetorical question applies psychological pressure rather than seeking an answer. The
Armenian translation maintains the interrogative force, preserving the coercive and threatening
undertone.
Example:
English: “In the ring. Last jumper! Time to fight.”
Armenian: «Օղակի մեջ։ Վերջին ցատկողը։ Կռվելու ժամանակն է»
Analysis:
The extremely short sentences and sharp imperatives create a fast, aggressive rhythm that
immediately establishes tension. The fragmented structure mimics military commands and
reflects the brutality of Dauntless training. The Armenian translation preserves this clipped
syntax and imperative force, maintaining the same sense of urgency and authority.

Example:
English: “Go!”
Armenian: «Գնա՛»
Analysis:
This one-word imperative relies on intonation rather than lexical complexity to convey urgency.
Its phonetic sharpness accelerates the pace of the scene. Armenian retains the expressive power
through stress and imperative mood, ensuring the command remains equally forceful.

Example:
English: “Nice, Tris! Nice. Yeah!”
Armenian: «Լավ էր, Թրիս։ Լավ։ Այո՛»
Analysis:
Repetition and exclamatory intonation express encouragement and group energy. The rhythm
reinforces solidarity within the faction. The Armenian version mirrors the repetition, preserving
the emotional intensity and supportive tone.

2.2 Lexical Stylistic Devices and Expressive Means

Example:
English: “Know what this board is? It’s your life.”
Armenian: «Գիտե՞ք ինչ է այս տախտակը։ Սա ձեր կյանքն է»
Analysis:
The metaphor equates a training scoreboard with life itself, emphasizing how completely the
system controls individual fate. Armenian preserves the metaphor directly, maintaining its
symbolic and oppressive meaning.

Example:
English: “If you’re still in the red by the end of the first stage, you’re out.”
Armenian: «Եթե առաջին փուլի վերջում դեռ կարմիր գոտում ես, դուրս ես»
Analysis:
Color symbolism functions as an evaluative lexical device, where “red” signifies failure and
danger. The Armenian translation retains the metaphorical meaning, preserving the atmosphere
of constant judgment and exclusion.

Example:
English: “Don’t be scared, stiff!”
Armenian: «Մի՛ վախեցիր, փայտացած»
Analysis:
The insult acts as a lexical marker of faction hierarchy and social pressure. It reinforces the
opposition between insiders and outsiders. Armenian keeps the derogatory nuance, maintaining
the humiliating and confrontational tone.

Example:
English: “If you don’t fit into a category, they can’t control you.”
Armenian: «Եթե դու չես տեղավորվում որևէ կատեգորիայի մեջ, նրանք չեն
կարող քեզ վերահսկել»
Analysis:
Abstract nouns such as “category” and “control” reveal the ideological foundation of the faction
system. The Armenian translation preserves the abstract vocabulary, keeping the political and
philosophical weight of the statement intact.

2.3 Syntactical Stylistic Devices and Expressive Means

Example:
English: “Hang there… Fall and die… Or, give up.”
Armenian: «Կախված մնա… ընկիր ու մեռիր… կամ հանձնվիր»
Analysis:
Parallel sentence structures present a limited set of brutal choices, increasing psychological
pressure. Armenian maintains the same parallelism and ellipsis, preserving the dramatic tension
and sense of inevitability.

Example:
English: “You really want to lose ’em on their first fight?”
Armenian: «Իսկապե՞ս ուզում ես նրանց կորցնել առաջին կռվում»
Analysis:
This rhetorical question challenges authority rather than seeking an answer. It introduces doubt
and moral tension. Armenian retains the interrogative structure and confrontational tone.

Example:
English: “Stand in front of the target.”
Armenian: «Կանգնի՛ր թիրախի առաջ»
Analysis:
The imperative structure emphasizes absolute obedience and hierarchy. Armenian preserves the
authoritative command through verb form and intonation, maintaining the disciplinary
atmosphere.

Example:
English: “I was Candor. And I’m not lying.”
Armenian: «Ես Քենդոր էի։ Եվ չեմ ստում»
Analysis:
The short, fragmented sentences emphasize sincerity and emotional tension. Armenian mirrors
the brevity and clarity, keeping the firmness and personal conviction of the speaker.

Example:
English: “They divided us into five groups… factions, to keep the peace.”
Armenian: «Նրանք մեզ բաժանեցին հինգ խմբի… ֆակցիաների,
խաղաղությունը պահպանելու համար»
Analysis:
The pause created by the ellipsis emphasizes the artificial nature of the division. The noun
“factions” is isolated syntactically, which draws attention to the ideological foundation of the
society. In Armenian, the same pause and explanatory structure are preserved, maintaining the
sense of imposed order rather than natural unity.

Example:
English: “The smart ones, the ones who value knowledge and logic… are in Erudite. They know
everything.”
Armenian: «Խելացիները, նրանք, ովքեր գնահատում են գիտելիքն ու
տրամաբանությունը… Էրուդիտում են։ Նրանք ամեն ինչ գիտեն»
Analysis:
This is an example of hyperbole and parallelism. The repetition of “the ones who” idealizes
Erudite members, while the absolute statement “They know everything” exaggerates their
intellectual authority. Armenian keeps the absolutism, reinforcing the ironic tone that later
becomes critical.

Example:
English: “Brave, fearless and free.”
Armenian: «Քաջ, անվախ և ազատ»
Analysis:
The asyndetic list (absence of conjunctions) creates a rhythmic, slogan-like quality. It reflects
Tris’s idealized perception of Dauntless. Armenian mirrors the concise triad, preserving the
emotional admiration and simplicity.

Example:
English: “Some people think Dauntless are crazy… which, they kind of, are.”
Armenian: «Ոմանք կարծում են, որ Դաունթլեսը խենթ է… և, ինչ-որ չափով,
այդպես էլ կա»
Analysis:
This sentence combines ellipsis with conversational irony. The informal interruption “kind of”
weakens the judgment while simultaneously confirming it. Armenian successfully conveys this
hesitation and irony through equivalent modal phrasing.

Example:
English: “The others all call us ‘stiffs.’”
Armenian: «Մյուսները մեզ բոլորը «փայտացած» են անվանում»
Analysis:
The use of slang functions as a lexical marker of social discrimination. The derogatory
nickname reinforces faction stereotypes. Armenian translation preserves the metaphorical insult,
maintaining its dehumanizing effect.

Example:
English: “It all works. Everyone knows where they belong. Except for me.”
Armenian: «Ամեն ինչ աշխատում է։ Բոլորը գիտեն, թե որտեղ է իրենց տեղը։
Բացի ինձնից»
Analysis:
Short declarative sentences followed by an abrupt exception create syntactic contrast. This
highlights the protagonist’s inner conflict. Armenian retains the same structure, preserving the
emotional isolation expressed in the final sentence.

Example:
English: “There’s an art to losing yourself.”
Armenian: «Քեզ կորցնելու մեջ արվեստ կա»
Analysis:
This is a metaphor that frames self-denial as a skill rather than a loss. It reflects Abnegation
ideology. Armenian keeps the metaphor intact, preserving its philosophical and emotional depth.

Example:
English: “Trust the test.”
Armenian: «Վստահիր թեստին»
Analysis:
The imperative functions as an ideological slogan. Its brevity and repetition throughout the text
reinforce blind obedience to the system. Armenian mirrors the command form, maintaining its
authoritarian undertone.

Example:
English: “Am I smart? Kind? Am I honest? Selfless? Or brave?”
Armenian: «Խե՞լացի եմ։ Բարի՞։ Ազնիվ ե՞մ։ Անշահախի՞նդ։ Թե՞ քաջ»
Analysis:
A sequence of rhetorical questions reflects identity fragmentation. The one-word questions
emphasize uncertainty and internal conflict. Armenian preserves the interrogative rhythm,
reinforcing psychological tension.
Example:
English: “Faction before blood.”
Armenian: «Ֆակցիան՝ արյունից առաջ»
Analysis:
This is a symbolic slogan expressing ideological absolutism. The parallel structure elevates
faction loyalty above family ties. Armenian keeps the sharp contrast, preserving its moral
severity.

Example:
English: “The faction system is a living being… composed of cells, all of you.”
Armenian: «Ֆակցիոն համակարգը կենդանի օրգանիզմ է… բաղկացած
բջիջներից, այսինքն՝ ձեզնից»
Analysis:
An extended biological metaphor portrays society as an organism.
Individuals are reduced to functional units, reinforcing collectivist ideology. Armenian
accurately conveys the metaphor, maintaining its dehumanizing implication.

Example:
English: “Human nature is the enemy.”
Armenian: «Մարդկային բնույթը թշնամին է»
Analysis:
This declarative sentence uses personification and absolutism to justify authoritarian control.
The Armenian translation preserves the starkness, reinforcing its ideological extremism.

2.1 Phonetic Stylistic Devices and Expressive Means

1. Repetition / Rhythm: “Go, go, go!”

2. Alliteration: “peace is not merely an ideal… its an obligation” (repetition of /p/
and /ɪ/ sounds)
3. Onomatopoeia (implied in action speech): “Run!”, “Fire!”, “Stop!”

1. Կրկնություն: «Գնա՛, գնա՛, գնա՛»

2. Հնչյունային համընկնում: «Խաղաղությունը պարզապես գաղափար
չէ, այն պարտականություն է»
3. Կարճ հրամայականներ: «Վազի՛ր», «Կանգնի՛ր»

Comparative Analysis

In both languages, repetition and short imperative forms heighten urgency and tension.
English relies heavily on sharp monosyllabic commands, while Armenian preserves
intensity through stress and repetition, maintaining emotional force.

2.2 Lexical Stylistic Devices and Expressive Means

 1. Metaphor: “peace is not merely an ideal… it’s an obligation”
2. Hyperbole: “We are all that’s left of humanity”
3. Evaluative vocabulary: “dangerous group”, “toxic surroundings”, “true enemy”

1. Փոխաբերություն: «Խաղաղությունը պարզապես գաղափար չէ, այլ

պարտականություն»
2. Չափազանցում: «Մենք մարդկության վերջին հույսն ենք»
3. Զգացմունքային բառապաշար: «վտանգավոր խումբ», «թունավոր
միջավայր», «իրական թշնամի»

Comparative Analysis

English uses abstract political metaphors to justify control, while Armenian translations
retain ideological weight through elevated lexical choices. Hyperbolic expressions
strengthen propaganda tone in both languages.

2.3 Syntactical Stylistic Devices and Expressive Means

1. Parallelism: “We are all of us living proof… we are all of us…”

2. Rhetorical questions: “Who’s gonna stop her? You?”
3. Ellipsis: “Still having nightmares?”

1. Զուգահեռ կառուցվածք: «Մենք բոլորս ապացույցն ենք… մենք

բոլորս…»
2. Հռետորական հարցեր: «Ո՞վ է կանգնեցնելու նրան»
3. Թերի նախադասություններ: «Դեռ մղձավանջնե՞ր»

Comparative Analysis

Syntactical compression is common in both languages to reflect spoken dialogue and

emotional tension. English frequently uses ellipsis, while Armenian compensates with
intonation and context.

2.1 Phonetic Stylistic Devices and Expressive Means

1. Repetition / Rhythm:
“Go, go, go!”
2. Sound repetition and rhythmic parallelism:
“Run! Run!”, “Higher! Higher!”
3. Sharp imperative commands:
“Stop!”, “Move!”, “Fire!”

1. Կրկնություն / Ռիթմ:
«Գնա՛, գնա՛, գնա՛»
2. Կրկնվող հրամայական ձևեր:
«Վազի՛ր, վազի՛ր», «Ավելի բարձր, ավելի բարձր»
3. Կարճ հրամաններ:
«Կանգնի՛ր», «Շարժվի՛ր»

Comparative Analysis
In both English and Armenian, phonetic stylistic devices such as repetition and rhythmic
imperatives serve to intensify urgency and emotional tension, particularly in action
scenes. English dialogue frequently relies on monosyllabic commands, which create a
rapid tempo and heightened dramatic pressure. Armenian translations preserve this
expressive force through repetition, emphatic stress, and intonation, ensuring that the
urgency of the original speech is retained.

2.2 Lexical Stylistic Devices and Expressive Means

1. Metaphor:
“Peace is not merely an ideal… it’s an obligation.”
2. Hyperbole:
“We are all that’s left of humanity.”
3. Evaluative and ideological vocabulary:
“dangerous group”, “toxic surroundings”, “true enemy”, “civilization’s last hope”

1. Փոխաբերություն:
«Խաղաղությունը պարզապես գաղափար չէ, այլ
պարտականություն»
2. Չափազանցում:
«Մենք մարդկության վերջին հույսն ենք»
3. Գնահատական բառապաշար:
«վտանգավոր խումբ», «թունավոր միջավայր», «իրական թշնամի»

Comparative Analysis

Lexical stylistic devices in the film play a key role in constructing ideological discourse
and justifying power structures. English frequently employs abstract metaphors and
hyperbolic expressions in political speeches, particularly in Jeanine’s monologues, to
legitimize control and repression. Armenian translations successfully preserve the
ideological weight of these expressions through elevated lexical choices, maintaining
the propagandistic and emotionally charged tone of the original.

2.3 Syntactical Stylistic Devices and Expressive Means

1. Parallelism:
“We are all of us living proof… we are all of us…”
2. Rhetorical questions:
“Who’s gonna stop her? You?”
3. Ellipsis and incomplete sentences:
“Still having nightmares?”
“You okay?”

1. Զուգահեռ կառուցվածք:
«Մենք բոլորս կենդանի ապացույցն ենք… մենք բոլորս…»
2. Հռետորական հարցեր:
«Ո՞վ է կանգնեցնելու նրան»
 3. Թերի նախադասություններ:
«Դեռ մղձավանջնե՞ր», «Լա՞վ ես»

Comparative Analysis

Syntactical stylistic devices in both languages reflect the spoken nature of cinematic
dialogue and convey psychological tension. English extensively uses ellipsis and
syntactic compression to express emotional strain and immediacy. Armenian
translations compensate for this compression through intonation, contextual clarity, and
slight syntactic expansion, preserving the pragmatic and emotional meaning of the
utterances.

Conclusion

The comparative stylistic analysis demonstrates that phonetic, lexical, and syntactical
devices used in the Divergent film series are largely preserved in Armenian translation,
with minor adaptive changes. Both languages effectively convey tension, ideological
conflict, and emotional depth. While English frequently relies on syntactic compression
and sharp imperatives, Armenian maintains expressive equivalence through repetition,
intonation, and elevated lexical choices. The quantitative data confirms a high density of
stylistic devices in both versions, indicating functional equivalence rather than literal
correspondence.
 Quantitative Data Presentation

English (Source Armenian Frequency

Stylistic Device
Frequency) (Preserved/Adapted) (%)

I. Phonetic Means 12 10 20%

Repetition/Rhythm 7 7 11.6%

Imperative Stress 5 3 8.4%

II. Lexical Means 28 25 46.7%

Metaphor 10 10 16.7%

Hyperbole 6 6 10%

Evaluative Epithets 12 9 20%

III. Syntactic
20 18 33.3%
Means

Parallelism 8 8 13.3%

Rhetorical
5 5 8.3%
Questions

Ellipsis 7 5 11.7%

TOTAL 60 53 100%

1. Predominance of Lexical Devices (46.7%)

The data indicates that the Divergent trilogy relies heavily on lexical stylistic devices to
establish its dystopian world and ideological conflicts. Metaphors (16.7%) and
evaluative epithets (20%) form the core of the stylistic palette, serving to categorize
individuals and justify the faction system. The Armenian translation shows a high
preservation rate (89%) in this category, confirming that most semantic and ideological
elements—such as the derogatory "Stiffs"—are culturally and linguistically transferable.
This suggests that devices rooted in social meaning and descriptive labeling are more
reliably reproduced in Armenian than those dependent on English sound patterns.

2. The Role of Syntactic Devices (33.3%)

Syntactic devices, such as parallelism (13.3%), rhetorical questions (8.3%), and ellipsis
(11.7%), make up one-third of all analyzed instances. These constructions emphasize
the authoritative tone of faction leaders and the internal turmoil of the protagonist.
Parallelism in the original script conveys control and indoctrination, while ellipsis reflects
the high-pressure environment of the post-apocalyptic setting. Armenian’s flexible
syntax allows these structures to be preserved in the vast majority of cases (90%),
effectively maintaining the original dramatic tempo and the pragmatic force of the
characters' speech.

3. The Functional Impact of Phonetic Devices (20%)

Phonetic devices are the least frequent and typically the most challenging to transfer
across linguistic boundaries. In this study, repetition and rhythm were successfully
maintained (100%) to preserve the cinematic pace and the urgency of action scenes.
However, imperative stress and certain sound-based effects (8.4%) suffered partial loss
due to the structural differences between English and Armenian. Translators frequently
compensated for these losses by using emphatic stress and lexical repetition, ensuring
that the auditory impact and the "staccato" rhythm of the Dauntless faction’s commands
remained powerful for the Armenian audience.

Summary of Quantitative Findings

The quantitative analysis confirms that while specific phonetic forms may be adapted in
translation, the functional and ideological weight of the original dialogue is largely
maintained. Armenian translators rely on the language's lexical richness and syntactic
flexibility to preserve the trilogy's distinct "dystopian register." Overall, the Armenian
version succeeds in conveying the authoritative tone of the state and the rebellious spirit
of the protagonist, ensuring a stylistically and functionally equivalent cinematic
experience for the target audience.
 CONCLUSION

The study of stylistic devices in the Divergent film trilogy shows how language is used to
build a world of control and rebellion. By looking at the English and Armenian versions
side-by-side, we can see that the way characters speak is just as important as the
action on screen. This review has shown that while English and Armenian are very
different in their grammar and sounds, the emotional and political messages of the story
remain strong in translation.

How Language Builds Character and Conflict

One of the most important things we found is that each faction in the movie has its own
"voice." For example, the leaders of the state use very organized and repetitive
language to sound powerful and in control. On the other hand, the main character, Tris,
starts the story speaking in short, unsure sentences, but as she becomes a rebel, her
language becomes much stronger and more direct. The Armenian translation does a
great job of keeping these differences. It ensures that the "bad guys" sound cold and
bossy, while the heroes sound brave and emotional. Without these specific styles of
speaking, the characters would lose their personality.

Keeping the Energy and Rhythm of the Film

Because Divergent is an action movie, the "sound" and speed of the talking are very
important. In the original English, many commands are just one short word, like "Run!"
or "Stop!" which makes the scene feel fast and dangerous. Even though Armenian
words are often longer, the translation keeps this energy by using repetition. For
example, repeating "Go, go, go!" in Armenian helps keep the same fast rhythm. We
found that the translator didn't just look for the right words, but also for the right "feeling"
of the sounds. This allows the Armenian audience to feel the same excitement and
tension as the original audience.

The Use of Meaning and Symbols

The movie uses many metaphors and symbols to explain its ideas. For example, calling
people "Stiffs" or talking about "the last hope of humanity" are ways to use words to
influence how people think. Our analysis shows that almost all of these metaphors were
kept in the Armenian version. The Armenian language has a very rich vocabulary for
emotions, so the translator was able to pick words that sound very serious and
important. This helps the audience understand the "politics" of the movie world.
Whether it is a speech about peace or a shout of anger, the meaning stays the same
across both languages.

Sentence Structure and Emotional Pace

The way sentences are built helps control how fast or slow a scene feels. In moments of
high stress, the characters use broken sentences or ask questions they don't expect an
answer to. This shows that they are scared or confused. Our research found that the
Armenian translation followed these patterns very closely. Instead of making the
sentences long and perfect, the translation kept them short and "choppy" during action
scenes. This keeps the emotional pace of the movie moving quickly. It shows that even
with different grammar rules, the "style" of a conversation can be successfully moved
from one language to another.

Final Thoughts on the Translation Strategy

Overall, the translation of the Divergent films is a success because it focuses on

"functional equivalence." This means the translator cared more about the effect the
words have on the audience than just a word-for-word copy. By using the strengths of
the Armenian language—like its expressive verbs and flexible word order—the
translation manages to capture the dark and intense atmosphere of a dystopian future.
This study proves that careful stylistic choices are what make a translated movie feel
natural and powerful. It shows that language is not just a way to give information, but a
tool to create a whole world.
 References

 Galperin, I. R. (1977). Stylistics. Moscow: Higher School.

 Kukharenko, V. A. (1986). A Book of Practice in Stylistics. Moscow: Higher

School.

 Arnold, I. V. (2002). The Stylistics of Modern English. Moscow: Flint.

 Nida, E. A., & Taber, C. R. (1969). The Theory and Practice of Translation.
Leiden: Brill.

 Newmark, P. (1988). A Textbook of Translation. New York: Prentice Hall.

 On Alliteration and Sound Patterns:

[Link]

 Metaphor and Dystopian Imagery: [Link]

direct=true&scope=site&jrnl=10252541

 Syntactic Parallelism:
[Link]

 Ellipsis in Spoken Dialogue:

[Link]

 Stylistics and Stylistic Devices (General): [Link]

 Antithesis and Contrast: [Link]

 Rhetorical Questions:
[Link]