2008

Ministry of Education and Science o f Ukraine Ivan Franko National University

of Lviv

Karolina Lototska

ENGLISH STYLISTICS

Textbook

Recommended by the Ministry o f Education

and Science o f Ukraine

LvivIvan Franko National University o f Lviv

Publishing Centre 2008

811.111 38(075.8) 143.21 - 773

80

:- . , . ..

( );- . , . ..

( );. . , . ..

( )

1.4/18--2301 03.11.2008.

.J1 80 : . . - :

, 2008. - 254 .

ISBN 978-966-613-653-7

, .

- , 20 -. , . , .

, .

811.11138(075.8) 111143.21 -773

ISBN 978-966-613-653-7 .., 2008

, 2008

C O N TENTSPreface............................................................................................... 8Lecture 1 .WHAT IS STYLISTICS?................................................. 9

Stylistics and the notion of style.................................................. 9Brief history of stylistics.............................................................. 12What does stylistics study?.......................................................... 15Stylistics and other linguistic disciplines.................................... 16Stylistic analysis.......................................................................... 18

Lecture 2. BASIC NOTIONS.......................................................... 20The author s individual style............................................... *......20The notion of norm/standard...................................................... 21The notion of code...................................................................... 23The categories of expressiveness and emotiveness....................24Expressive means and stylistic devices....................................... 26

I .ecture 3. THE NOTION OF CONTEXT........................... .............32Types and specifications of linguistic context............................. 32Extralinguistic context................................................................ 33Stylistic context........................................................................... 36The theory of strong position...................................................... 36Meaning from a stylistic viewpoint............................................. 38

Lccture 4. STYLISTIC DIFFERENTIATIONOF THE ENGLISH VOCABULARY.............................................. 43

National language. Modern varieties of English.......................43Bookish vs colloquial English.................................................... 44Literary and colloquial strata of words...................................... 47Special literary words................................................................. 49Special colloquial words............................................................. 51Stylistic coinages........................................................................ 56

Lecture 5. TROPES. A RHETORICAL IMAGE..............................58Trope as a basic notion of paradigmaticonomasiology. A rhetorical image.............................................. 58The study of tropes: various angles of analysis.........................59The classificatory problems: tropes and other SDs....................61

Lccture 6. METAPHOR.................................................................... 66Metaphor - a complex cultural and sociolinguistic phenomenon ....66Structural classifications of metaphor........................................ 69Genuine vs. trite, or dead, metaphors........................................74Special types of metaphor........................................................... 75

Lccture 7. METONYMY.................................................................. 80Types of metonymy. Synecdoche................................................. 80Semi-marked structures.............................................................. 83 8

Cru

Aic

Tuka

aH

rAiu

cbko

! m

ob

u

Hypallage (metonymical epithet)...............................................84

Lecture 8. IRONY............................................................................. 86The essence of irony. Verbal irony..............................................86Sustained (or structural) irony: various types............................87Irony and humour as forms Of the comical. Sarcasm.................88

Lecture 9. MAJOR STYLISTIC HYBRIDS..................................90Epithet: types and functions....................................................... 90Antonomasia............................................................................... 93Periphrasis. Euphemism............................................................. 95Hyperbole. Understatement........................................................ 98

Lecture 10. LEXICAL-SYNTACTIC STYLISTIC DEVICES........100Meiosis. Litotes........................................................................... 100Oxymoron................................................................................... 100Simile.......................................................................................... 102

Lecture 11. STYLISTIC USE OF PHRASEOLOGICALUNITS AND SET EXPRESSIONS.................................................. 107

Sayings and proverbs.................................................................. 107I Stylistic transformations of phraseological units.......................108I Allusion....................................................................................... 110

I Lecture 12. MAJOR FIGURES OF INEQUALITY......................... I l l: J Types of pun. Paronomasia......................................................... I l l I Zeugma....................................................................................... 113 J Semantically false chains (syllepsis)...........................................113 Paradox....................................................................................... 113 j Lecture 13. EXPRESSIVE SYNTAX............................................... 115j Sentence length and structure..................................................... 115 Stylistic types of sentence............................................................ 116I Suspense...................................................................................... 116: I The role of punctuation and graphical means............................119

: : Lecture 14. SYNTACTIC EXPRESSIVE MEANSg i ; AND STYLISTIC DEVICES........................................................... 122 Ij>: 9 Classification of syntactic EMs and SDs....................................122i : I Incompleteness of sentence structure. Ellipsis.

55 i I Nominative sentence....................................................................123 * I Asyndeton. Apokoinu. Aposiopesis..............................................124 ! Parcellation................................................................................ 125o

Arrangement of sentence components. InversionlS: Detachment. Parenthesis................ 125

Lecture 15. REPETITION .......129 The role oJ icfu'tition m ,n t ....... 129

The Junctions of repetition in literary works..............................130Classification of repetitions........................................................ 131Phonemic, morphemic and lexical repetitions............................131

Lecture 16. SYNTACTIC REPETITION. SYNTACTICPARALLELISM............................................................................... 140

Series. Binomials, trinomials, catalogues (enumeration)...........140Polysyndeton...............................................................................141Parallel patterns. Chiasmus....................................................... 142The logical-semantic types of parallelism..................................146Prolepsis (syntactic reduplication, or syntactic tautology)...,....150

Lecture 17. OTHER TYPES OF RECURRENCE...........................153Synonym repetition.................................................................... 153Pleonasm. Tautology.................................................................. 156Onomatopoeia - repetition of sounds and structures................157Rhythm........................................................................................ 161

I ccture 18. FUNCTIONAL STYLES OF ENGLISH......................163The problems of classification.................................................... 163The publicist style....................................................................... 167The newspaper style................................................................... 169The official style.......................... ...............................................172The scientific style...................................................................... 172

I ccture 19. THE BELLES-LETTRES STYLE................................174The functions of imaginative literature...................................... 174Emotive prose.............................................................................175

Poetry. Poetic diction. Metre and rhyme................................,...178English verse forms.................................................................... 185The style of drama...................................................................... 187

Lccture 20. TYPES OF NARRATIVE. NARRATIVE-< OMPOSITIONAL FORMS........................................................... 190

The notion of point of view'.......................................................190Types of narrative. Types of auctorial narration........................190Entrusted narrative. Impersonal and personified 1-narrator.....192

The narrative-compositional forms. Narrative proper.Description. Argumentation........................................................194The characters discourse. Dialogue. Interior speech............... 196Represented speech.....................................................................197

huctical Assignments....................................................................... 201Hiibjcct Index.................................................................................... 235UHcrcnces and Recommended Literature........................................239I iM of Authors Whose Texts Were Used as Examples.....................151

Preface

i.3

8

English Stylistics is a theoretical textbook and a practical manual intended for university students majoring in the English language and literature. Its twenty chapters ("Lectures ) cover all the main themes traditionally included in the university syllabus in this subject. The presented approaches, the treatment and systematization of basic concepts have been worked out, formulated and grounded on the well-known publications of modern home and foreign stylisticians. The book is based on the course of lectures delivered by the author to the 3rd-year students of the English department, but it may also be used as a reference book by the 4-5th- year students preparing for their state examinations or working on graduation papers dealing with stylistics and stylistic analysis of the text.

The book is designed to combine both the theoretical elucidation of the principal problems of stylistics (including some of its modern, highly interdisciplinary issues and aspects of analysis) with the practical examination of numerous expressive resources of the English language. One more aim of the manual is to acquaint students with the complex terminology employed in style studies and to develop their ability to differentiate, perceive and interpret the multifarious language phenomena of various levels in terms of their stylistic and pragmatic functioning in different oral and written types of discourse. The book contains thematically arranged assignments aiming to give students some practical guidance in thoughtful reading and stylistic analysis, samples of which are presented in the last section of the supplement. The questions for self- control given after each* lecture and a great number of examples discussed and analysed in the text of the book are meant to prepare students for conducting independent stylistic analysis of the passages suggested in Practical Assignments. The illustrations are taken from both prose and poetry works of prominent authors whose names are enumerated at the end of the textbook, where students can also find a subject index and a list of references and literary sources recommendedfor further reading.

11XTIIRE 1WHAT IS STYLISTICS?

Stylistics and the notion of style B rirf history of stylistics What does stylistics study? Stylistics and other linguistic disciplines Stylistic analysis

Sometimes called linguostylistics, this branch of linguistics is understood differently in modern schools and trends, and each approach has its objective grounds. It is not easy to specify the scope of problems modem stylistics is to solve, and it happens for the following reasons.

First, unlike other disciplines that treat one linguistic level cuch (phonetics, morphology, lexicology, syntax, text linguistics), stylistics deals with every level and all the levels. Thus it is not a level discipline. S. Ullmann uses the term parallel describing this property of stylistics.

Second, the elements of these levels are examined and treated by stylistics primarily in their functional aspect, i.e. stylistics studies not only various expressive means, stylistic devices, stylistically marked Icxical and syntactic models, but also the functioning of those elements in the text and of separate subsystems (so-called functional styles) of language in general [75, p. 8].

Third, the notion of style, which gave birth to the name of this discipline, is many-sided, versatile and rather controversial. The word goes back to the Latin word stilus and Greek stylos which first meant the tool of writing - a pointed stick, sort of a pen used for writing on wax plates, and then also the manner of writing. The term style is used most ambiguously in philological studies:

1. It may mean a variety of language typical of some definite sphere of social life. This variety has its own parametres: lexical, grammatical, and phonetic. Traditionally, three most general types of speech, or styles are distinguished in national languages: neutral, high (literary) and low (colloquial). g)

Cru

Aic

Tuka

aH

rAiu

cbko

i m

ob

u

cXap

owHa

Sl

omou

pKQ

2. This understanding of style comes close to the notions o f"register (D.Crystal) and, partially, discourse, first used in Western linguistics and stylistics which have assimilated the communicative approach to style study. People use different registers depending on the communicative situation, the aims of communication as well as the speakers social and educational status. According to R. Fowler, register is a sociolinguistic term meaning a distinctive use of language to fulfil a particular communicative function in a particular kind of situation [151, p. 191]. Thus in various situations people usually resort to different ways of conveying some idea:

I have certainly never seen the man. (neutral, standard) I deny the fact of ever having seen this person, (official, book

ish; juridical sphere) Never seen the chap, not I. (colloquial) Me, I never clapped eyes on this here guy. (low colloquial,

illiterate) I have no association with the appearance of the individual

I behold, (high-flown, pompous, affective manner of speech) (these examples are taken from Yu.M. Srebnevs Fundamentals of,English Stylistics [93, p. 11]).

As we have seen, one and the same thing can be expressed in different ways. To illustrate the point O.S. Akhmanova, for example, refers to the following short dialogue from Arthur Alexander Milnes famous book Winnie-the-Pooh:

... The atmospheric conditions have been very unfavourable lately, said Owl.

"The what?""It has been raining , explained Owl."Yes", said Christopher Robin. "It has".The flood level has reached an unprecedented height , said

Owl. "The who?""There is a lot of water about, explained Owl. "Yes, said

Christopher Robin, "there is"... [98, pp. 184185].The sophisticated Owl employs an official weathcr-forccast

language. The boy cannot understand her, so the owl has to translate her way of saying it into everyday colloquial. The dialogue, as a result, sounds funny since here the author resorts to one of most widely used devices - using the wrong register or clashing the styles

10 that are incompatible. Therefore, we should remember that using

Nlylcs/registers inappropriately may have a ludicrous effect. (Imagine I lie situation in an operating theatre when a surgeon is addressing a nurse assisting him as follows: / would be extremely grateful if you would be so kind as to pass me that scalpel, nurse It is doubtful that their patient should survive the operation). So the most impor- lunt thing is to be consistent in the language we use, i.e. not to mix Myles/registers (e.g. Today I wanna discuss problems connected with thermodynamics). We should apply different registers and rules of communication in different situations and speech contexts: the learned dissertation will be very different in language from a paper read out at an academic conference, from a lecture given to students, nr from a radio-talk delivered to the general public [178, p. 149].

Consequently, certain typified contexts and communicative situations demand the use of some certain vocabulary and syntactic structures. These definite sets, or paradigms of language units, are allied functional styles, i.e. they belong to the functional aspects of lunguage, or in B.N. Golovins [32] terms, they are types of language f unctioning (see Lectures 18-19 of this book). Each functional style in realized in either oral or written forms and has its peculiarities lit the spheres of lexis, phraseology, word-building, morphology, syntax, phonetics, in the use of emotional and figurative means of expressiveness, in having its own system of cliched expressions.The inventory of functional styles is one more debatable point in modem stylistics, namely in its very important trend, or branch, culled functional stylistics.

3. The notion of style may mean an individual manner of pre- Kcntation when we deal with the language of oral speech or written lexts, artistic texts in particular. It is used as a synonym to the notion of the author s individual style, or the authors idiostyle. Here the Ibllowing popular, though vague, definitions may sound relevant: Style is choice, Style is deviations [154, p. 11]. The authors choice of language means, viewed as correlated with his creative concepts, is the centre of attention of the authors stylistics, also called the stylistics of the encoder (the writer/speaker is a person who encodes the information into the message using a code - the language). Correspondingly, decoding stylistics deals with problems connected with adequate reception, or decoding, of the message.

4. Style may be understood as techniques of expression, i.e. the ability to write clearly, correctly, and adequately in terms of the f j

Cru

Aic

Tuka

aH

rAiu

cbko

i m

ob

u

standards of a concrete communicative type of text. It is the object of practical stylistics and works on composition.

To summarize the approaches to the notion of style we may quote one of the most frequently cited definitions given by Seymour Chatman: Style is a product ofindividual choices and patterns of choices among linguistic possibilities [quoted from 37, p. 13]. So, if linguistics is a study of the materials available to users of language, stylistics is a study of the particular choices an author/speaker makes from the available materials, choices that are largely culture-oriented and situation-based. There is, according to Roger Fowler, a fundamental division between the linguistic materials available (grammatical facts) and the use made of them (stylistic facts).

A somewhat narrow treatment of stylistics as the study of synonymic language resources, suggested by the French linguist Charles Bally at the beginning of the 20th century, is to some extent in tune with the aforementioned understanding of the notion of style. In 1909 Ch. Bally published his Traite de Stylistique Frangaise from which linguistic stylistics originated, though the terms style and stylistics appeared in the early 19 century in the works of German romanticists in connection with the notion of individual creative personality. The first works on stylistics are, probably, The Philosophy of Style by Herbert Spencer (1852) and Zur Stylistik by Heiman Steinthal (1866), as well as those by such famous Ukrainian and Russian philologists of the 19 century as O. O. Potebnya, A. N. Veselovsky and others, who started to approach literary texts from a linguistic viewpoint.

The beginning of modem stylistics in Anglo-American criticism is usually traced back to the publication of the books listed below:

Fowler, Roger (ed.) Essays on Style and Language. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1966.

Freeman, Donald C. (ed.) Linguistics and Literary Style. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1971.

Leech, Geoffrey N, A Linguistic Guide to English Poetry. London: Longman, 1969.

s ; . In Eastern Europe stylistics became a more or less independent branch of linguistics at the beginning of the 20th century. The mem

bers of the Formalist Linguistic Circle in Moscow (usually called the Russian Formalists) rejected undue concentration on the author in

12 literary criticism in favour of the analysis of the language of the text.

I.3

I'hcy were interested in the psychological effects produced by that linguistic structure. The group contained linguists, literary critics and psychologists. They (as well as the Prague Structuralists - V. Math- rsius, J.Mukafosky) began to develop what became a very influential aspect of textual study in later stylistics, called the foregrounding theory. This view suggested that some parts of texts had more ef- Icct on readers than others in terms of interpretation, because they were linguistically deviant or specially patterned in some way, thus lie coming psychologically salient, noticeable (or foregrounded) lor readers. According to Mick Short, the Russian Formalists were, in fact, the first stylisticians. But their work was not understood in l he west because of the effects of the Russian Revolution in 1917. A Her the revolution, formalism fell out of favour and, in any case, ueademic communication between what became the Soviet Union unci Western Europe and North America virtually ceased [194].

One of the members of the Formalist Linguistic circle was Roman Jakobson, one of the most influential linguists of the twentieth rentury, and the reason for his considerable influence on stylistics, in addition to his own academic brilliance, was because he linked the linguistic schools of Russia, Eastern, Western and Central Europe and Ihe USA by bringing together their different approaches to literature mid language. He left Moscow in 1920 and moved to Prague, where lie became one of the founding members of the Prague School of linguistics. Then, fleeing from the Nazis, he moved first to Scandinavia andthen, in 1941, to the USA where he died in 1982. Mick Short compared R.Jakobson with a beneficial virus, who carried his approach and made a great contribution to literary analysis which underlies present-day stylistics [see 194],

Since the 60s of the 20th century stylistics has been developing quite intensively. Among Western linguists involved with linguistic criticism, literary and stylistic analysis we can mentionS.UllmannL-Spitzer, S.B.Chatman, S.R.Levin, D.Crystal, D.Davy, A.E.Darbyshire, M.Riffat erre, G.N.Leech, R.Barthes, R. de Beau- grande, W.Dressler, R.Fowler, M.A.K.Halliday, M.Short, D.Birch,II.G.Widdowson, R.Bradford, W.van Peer, K.Wales, G.Cook, I).Lodge, R.Carter, R.Gibbs, J.McRae and others.

In home linguistics of the second half of the 20 century stylistics was conceptually grounded and described by G.O .Vinokur and V.V.Vinogradov (in his books O H3biKe xyaoacecTBeHHOH

Cru

Aic

Tuka

aH

rAiu

cbko

i m

ob

u

jiHxepaTypbi (1959), CTHjincTHKa. Teopna nosTHHecKoii penn. rio3THKa (1963)). Various scientific paradigms, trends and methods of stylistics and literary studies have been developed and explored in the works by such prominent scholars of pre-soviet, soviet and postsoviet linguistic schools as Larin B.A., Peshkovsky A.M., Levin V.D., Polivanov E.D., Shcherba L.V., Bakhtin M.M., Tynyanov Y.N., Sorokin Yu.S., Likhachev D.S., Budagov R. A., Shcherba L.V., GalperinI.R., Stepanov Yu.S., Stepanov G.V., Akhmanova O.S., Arutyunova N.D., Kozhyna M.N., Lotman Yu.M., Solganik G.Ya., Arnold I.V., Skrebnev Yu.M., Zhyrmunsky V.M., Rozental D.E., Odintsov V.V., Tomashevsky B.V., Rasinkina N.M., Golovin B.N., Pelevina N.F., Brandes M.P., Maltsev V.A., Kukharenko V.A., Morohovsky O.M., Vorobiova O.P. and many others.

Thus the term stylistics is not old but the discipline originated from ancient Greek and Roman poetics and rhetoric. Modem poetics is a discipline concerned with the structural forms of literary art, both poetic and prosaic, and its crucial problem is: what turns a verbal message into a work of art [179, p. 3]. Rhetoric, actually, underlies modem practical stylistics, which deals with the norms of language usage at a given period and teaching these norms to language speakers and professionals, such as editors, publishers, writers, journalists, teachers, interpreters, etc.

The term stylistics became associated with detailed linguistic criticism because, at the time it developed, the study of authorial style was a major critical concern, and linguistic analysis, allied to statistics, was popular with the more linguistically inclined critics. According to some modem scholars, it is a less happy name now, as stylisticians have, by and large, moved away from the study of style and towards the study of how meanings and effects are produced by literary texts. There have been a few attempts to change the name: for example to literary linguistics or critical linguistics. But none of the labels so far proposed adequately covers all the aspects and areas treated by stylistics, and so Stylistics has survived as the most popular label, despite its shortcomings [see 194]. What, then, does it study, and what is meant by stylistics nowadays?

The modem British linguist Henry Widdowson [see 206] places Nlylistics in the middle of the following scheme:

LINGUISTICS LITERARY CRITICISM

t STYLISTICS t

LANGUAGE LITERATURE

By stylistics he means the study of literary discourse from a linguistic orientation, i.e. stylistics is an area of mediation between the two disciplines, the two subjects: language and literature. In R.de Beaugrandes words, stylistics applies linguistics to literature 1124], So the object of stylistic analysis is language fixed/represented in literary texts. Besides, under the influence of pragmatics, sociolinguistics and psychology modern stylistics includes into the sphere of its interest non-literary texts, assimilating a wider view of literature as discourse which must embrace both context and its users- writers, texts and readers within a sociocultural situation of mean- ing production and reception. So stylistics cannot and should not be isolated from other domains of human science, such as literature and literary criticism, theory of information, semiotics, psychology, logic, statistics, computer linguistics, sociolinguistics, pragmatics, cognitive science, history of language, etc. In general, modem stylistics is characterized by its complex approach to style study, i.e. by having recourse to methods, facts and data of other disciplines connected with language studies.

Despite the fact that the range of interests and tasks is extremely wide, there are two main, traditional fields of investigation of stylistics:

1. special language media called expressive means (EMs) and stylistics devices (SDs)

2. laws of language functioning in various spheres of social life and communicative situations, namely the functional styles of (literary) language, their aims and characteristic features.

cKap

oMHa

Ul

omou

pKQ

As stylistics is not a level discipline (see above), it may legitimately be divided into separate branches, such as stylistic phonetics, or phonostylistics, stylistic morphology, stylistic lexicology, stylistic syntax, or syntactic stylistics. It is thus connected with other disciplines, or branches of linguistics, their interdependence and distinctions being quite obvious: Phonostylistics. Unlike phonetics, which studies the articulation

of speech sounds, intonation, rhythm, and accent, phonostylistics shows how separate sounds, sound combinations, intonation and stress can serve as expressive means and stylistic devices to convey the authors idea, emotions; also how various sound combinations serve as the basis for rhyme, rhythm, alliteration (e.g.: Alls well that ends well", All that glitters is not gold). It deals with prosodic means and sound instrumentation. One of the objectives of phonostylistics is also intonational functional styles.

Stylistic lexicology. Lexicology studies the morphemic structure, history and meanings of words. Stylistics studies the word in its expressive function. It concerns not only with the language means as such but with their expressive potential. The word, as is known, can express the speakers subjective attitude (positive or negative) or evaluation of the object, phenomenon, action or quality described. In this case we say that the word acquires a certain emotional-evaluative connotation. The notion of connotation is used in lexicology as well, especially when we deal with synonyms - words that have the same denotation but differ in connotations. The literal, or actual, referential, meaning of the word is called denotation, or denotative component of the semantic structure of the word. Connotation (from the Latin con- notatio) means an additional or suggested meaning. It is a sort of implication or association that the word can have or suggest. For example, the word 'home" has a connotation (or connota- tive component) of comfort". The denotation is the objective relationship between a lexeme and the reality to which it refers: the denotation of the word spectacles is the object we wear on our nose". It is actually a dictionary meaning. By contrast, connotations refer to the personal aspect of lexical meaning, often the emotional associations which a lexeme incidentally l>i to mind. So, for many people the word has (In- .nm.i.iimns

of cheapness" and conveniencefor others, discomfort and inconvenience". Varying according to the experience of individuals, they are to some degree unpredictable. On the other hand, because people do have some common experiences, many lexemes have connotations shared by large groups of speakers.For example, among the widely recognized connotations of the word city" are bustle, crowds, dust, excitement, fun, sin, etc. Here we deal with general connotations. They may even be marked in dictionaries by so called stylistic markers, or values, such as derogatory, emotive, emphatic, poetic, ironical, jocular, pejorative, laudatory, euphemistic, humorous, etc. The language of politics and religion is full of such loaded expressions (highly charged with connotations); the language of science and law attempts to avoid connotational vocabulary.

Syntactic stylistics. This branch of stylistics treats grammatical and syntactic phenomena as EMs which add different emotional and stylistic colouring to the utterance. Grammar deals with morphology and syntax, i.e. rules for forming words and combining them into sentences. Stylistics studies the peculiarities of individual grammatical forms, word-combinations, sentence-structures, paragraphs in their stylistic functioning. According to G.Ya. Solganik, syntactic stylistics is a study of syntactic structures and forms of speech from the point of view of their stylistic properties [95, p. 8]. For instance, the stylistic possibilities and role of direct and indirect speech can be exemplified by the lines from the beginning of J. Austens famous novel Pride and Prejudice:

"My dear Mr. Bennet, said his lady to him one day, have you heard that Netherfield Park is let at last?

Mr. Bennet replied that he had not.But it is , returned she; ' for Mrs. Long has just been here,

and she told me all about it.Mr. Bennet made no answer.Do not you want to know who has taken it? cried his wife

Impatiently.J. Austens use of forms of speech conjures up the image of Mr.

Ik'I met who is tired of his wifes constant chatter and silly gossip. The nIiiM to indirect spccch in the second scntencc implies Mr. Bcnnets we,tty. M illc i inc. ii".|>

Kapo

jiinn

Ulom

oupK

a

most vividly. Critics believe the second sentence to be one of the most economically expressed sarcastic lines in English literature.

To be able to reveal the content of a work of art (as well as any other piece of text, including non-literary) in all its implications, to be able to read between the lines we need to study the stylistic presentation of what is said, i.e. we need careful analysis of linguistic choices and deviations from norms. These peculiarities, or deviations, are employed for creative purposes that underlie the authors manner of telling, or his style. For inexperienced or unsophisticated readers (and students) it may not seem as essential as plot or characters in a book, but it is a misjudgment. Style is an indispensable characteristic of any text. Literary texts always express meaning on different levels or in different layers. In other words, they express something beyond their literal meaning, and these other layers of meaning can be explored by attentive reading and analysis. It resembles the work of an archaeologist: the deeper one digs, the more interesting ones findings are likely to be. Stylistic analysis helps to foster such interpretative skills [135, p. 5], skills of competent reading. And it has among its main objectives the understanding of the effects produced by particular stylistic devices and techniques as well as their influence on our response to the works other elements - particularly character, incident, setting, and theme - and to the work as a whole [see 183]. Using a popular comparison, it is rather like taking a car- engine to pieces, looking at each component in detail, then observing its functioning as the whole engine starts working. Unfortunately, in the stylistic analysis of a text, especially an artistic text, it is often impossible to use some strict formal algorithm of research, i.e. a set of rules and procedures to be followed in stylistic description (as is possible to do in other spheres of linguistic analysis). Besides, the existing approaches to stylistic analysis are quite numerous and diverse, which is explained by the fact that stylistics, as a field of study, is highly interdisciplinary and considerably eclectic. There is one more factor of influnce - text perception and understanding are always rather subjective. Moreover, very many stylistic notions and categories defy simple description and explanation. Here the so-called linguistic sense (H. Sweets term), a hardly definable but obviously real category, assumes great importance. This faculty of conscious or intuitive feeling about the language peculiarities,

(his innate ability to understand various stylistic properties and potentialities of words, phrases and longer text structures is naturally more developed in some people than in others; but it can always be strengthened by training and cultivating.

So stylistic analysis is a part of literary studies, of any adequate linguistic description. Stylistic analysis is practised as a means of understanding the possible meanings in a text as well as finding out (he individual properties of concrete texts or text types. Its ultimate uim is to clarify the message of the authors work through careful observation and consistent description of language phenomena in I he text under study.

Questions for self-control:

1. Explain why stylistics is not a level discipline2. Dwell upon the notion of style and various approaches to its interpretation.3. How did stylistics develop into an important constituent of linguistics?4. What is foregrounding?5. What does stylistics studj?6. What is the object of functional stylistics? What is decoding stylistics?7. Expand on the interrelations between stylistics and other branches of linguistics.8. What is the main purpose of stylistic analysis of a text?

LECTURE 2SASIC NOTIONS

The authors individual style The notion of norm/ standard The notion of code The categories of expressiveness and emotiveness Expressive means and stylistic devices

To analyse the text professionally we need linguistic competence which, according to J.McRae, is the ability to process a text in terms of (1) language, (2) content, (3) effect and (4) impact [see 135]. As soon as language begins to mean, it begins to expand its meaning, to make demand on its users (readers) and then questions of interpretations, of shades of meaning, of reaction and response are brought into play. But linguistic competence (especially for philologists and other specialists, i.e. people specially trained in the field of language functioning) presupposes knowledge of major notions and terms that comprise the metalanguage of linguistics and stylistics: one needs suitable equipment, or tools, for conducting stylistic analysis comprehensively. The inventory of special terms used in stylistics is rather large and often confusing. So it is logical to start with some fundamental notions that are indispensable for stylistics as a language science, and besides, we need some working definitions before proceeding to more complex phenomena and their description.

The definition of style as a product of individual choices among linguistic possibilities brings USto the notion of the individual style of an author. The creative individuality on the one hand, and the

| j subjective representation of reality on the other, constitute the or- i I ganizing axis of any literary work, for in expressing his vision of

g J the world, the author represents reality in the way that he considers | i I to be most fitting" [96, p. 7], i.e. he has his own style. I.R.Galperin

\|h * defines the authors individual style as a unique combination of language units, EMs and SDspeculiar to a given writer, which makes that writers works or even utterances easily recognizable [154,

20 P- 17]. Let us take a closer look at this definition.

Being unique and peculiar implies some definite treatment of language means by that writer and his/her preferences for definite language media (expressive means and stylistics devices in particular) that are noticeable against the background of neutral language means. That is why it is not justifiable to confuse or use, as some scholars tend to do, the terms idiolect and idiostyle (individual style) indiscriminately or interchangeably. Idiolect means total amount of a language that one person knows and uses (OALD), and certainly there will be peculiarities typical of that particular individuals speech. Idiolect, also termed in British linguistics as a personal dialect, is shaped by the regional and social characteristics of the speaker and manifested in this persons pronunciation variety, lexical choices and grammatical patterns, all of which reflect his social class and education. By contrast, idiostyle presupposes a deliberate choice of words, sentence-struc- tures and stylistics devices. It is not only a language characteristic but also a text characteristic. Writers foreground certain features making their readers be able to imagine and share their feelings and experiences. The devices they use for that purpose may pass unobserved by an inexperienced reader but for a linguist studying the writers style they are significant. So our task is to learn how to be able to discern the potentialities of language means in a work of art, analyse them and appreciate the authors choice and ideas. As some scholar aptly remarked, readers are losers when they fail to see in a work of literature all that may be legitimately seen there.

The style being recognizable implies its being typical of and peculiar to the writers works and different from usual ways of expression, i.e. there are some justifiable deviations from standards, or norms. Here we have come to the notion of norm which is one of the most controversial terms used in modem stylistics.

What is norm and what should be considered normal? First, as Guy Cook puts it, what is normal varies with individuals and in history [140, p. 154], For example, in Jane Austens prose (early 19 century) you can come across such structures as / know not" or She was one and twenty", which are considered to be non-standard, stylistically marked or incorrect in modem English. So the notions of standard and norm are historically flexible. Second, if the norm 21

Cru

AiC

Tuka

aH

rAiu

cbko

I m

ob

u

cKap

oMHa

Ul

omou

pKa

means a recognized or received standard, the question arises: by whom and for whom? Yu.M.Skrebnev [93] claims quite justifiably that there are as many norms as there are communicative contexts (termed by him as sublanguages), and that it would be absurd to confuse what is neutral with what is normal: the characteristic feature of norm in language is its plurality. There has never been one single norm for all. For example, the sentence 7/e hasn t seen anything is considered standard, or normal by an educated English speaker since it conforms to the established rules of English grammar. But an illiterate person might convey the same thought as He ain't never seen nothing, and this incorrect, substandard way of expression will be quite normal for him. So what is normal for one might be a deviation for another. In fact, there is a paradox: norms can be established only when there are deviations from them. It is true of any sphere of life. Normality and deviance are an instance of a mutually defining binary pair, in which neither term can mean without the other (after H.Cixous and C.Clement [138]). Only the deviations should be slight and should not exceed the limits set by the invariant, which is an abstract, ideal notion of norm (at all levels of the language). Each invariant has its variants - actual realizations in speech. They might deviate but slightly from the abstract norms otherwise they will be misleading or unrecognizable. For example, the long phoneme i: might be longer or shorter as it is pronounced by different individuals, but it should not be short and open enough to change its quantitative into qualitative characteristics thus turning into the short phoneme i and affecting the meaning of the word: deed:: did.

To sum up, the norm, or standard, can be defined as the invariant of the phonetic, morphological, lexical and syntactic patterns circulating in speech (language-in-action) at a given period of time [154, p. 19]. There are different normsfor various types of speech. Thus the notion stylistic norm" becomes relevant in terms of different styles or registers: the norms of spoken and written varieties of language differ in many respects (lexis, grammar, syntax, etc.), as well as the language of emotive prose differs from that of official documents, for example; or that of poetry and drama within the belles-lettres style.

Furthermore, linguistic and stylistic deviations typical of a cer- 22 tain authors idiostyle should be justifiable, for, as Albert Camus

once wittily remarked, those who write clearly have readers, those who write obscurely have commentators. True, a genuine style is marked by its uniqueness, but the uniqueness and greatness are not necessarily based on sophistication and complexity of style. Great writers are often famous not necessarily for their experimental writing manner or elaborate expressions but rather for their subtle treatment of certain language means.

It has already been stated that the study of an individual writers style is the objective of stylistics of the encoder. To explain the notion of code we need to dwell upon the theory of speech acts and texts as their result.

The speech act, or act of communication, consists of 3 components:

ADDRESSER ( Speaker Author

Encoder)

transmissionMESSAGE

(text)

COMMON CODE

receptionADDRESSEE

( Listener Reader

Decoder)

COMMONSPEECH

(language)

BACKGROUND(referential)

KNOWLEDGE

The act of communication consists of encoding the message, its transmission through writing or speech, its reception and decoding by cither a reader or a listener. The addresser and the addressee should know the code - the same language and the same background knowledge, which facilitates communication. The background knowledge usually comprises social, cultural, mythological, religious, historical, literary, philosophical and other facts presumably well known to most readers/listeners. To be able to understand some texts, for example scientific articles, one needs to have special knowledge in some definite field of science. And it is decoding stylistics that deals with adequate decoding, i.e. reception of the message without any informational losses or distortions. Literary communication was described by RJakobson as a process involving six elements: sender, message, receiver, channel (or contact), context and code. In pragmatic stylistics and in modem approaches to the theory of communication, namely those based on D.Sperber and D.Wilsons

Cni

Aic

Tuka

aH

rAiu

cbko

I m

ob

u

Some scholars (see, for ex., O. Grishina [36]) believe that these notions should not be confused and state that expressiveness is the realization of the author s intentions to express emotions. Emotiveness is the expression of feelings and emotions and it can be expressed verbally and non-verbally. Expressiveness is a kind of emphasis, intensification of the utterance or a part of it. The emphasis can be logical and/or emotional, thus the notion expressiveness is broader than the notion emotiveness. Emotiveness is an integral part of expressiveness, but they are not always identical. The following drawing shows their correlation:

As we see, emotive elements are always expressive, whereas expressive elements may not always be emotive. According to I.R.Galperin, there are language means that aim simply at logical emphasis of certain parts of the utterance and do not evoke any intellectual representation of feelings. It is most conspicuously observed in syntactically emphatic sentences such as those with inversion, repetition but without words conveying some positive/negative emotions: (1) It took us a very, very long time. (2) It was Mum who always cared about Roger. However, the intonation may add some certain emotional colouring to these utterances. Still, in sentence (1) (if it is not pronounced but only read, and is taken out of the context) one cannot be absolutely sure whether the author is pleased with the situation or not. The difference becomes obvious when a sentence has some words that possess emotive/evaluative (positive or negative) connotations in their semantic structure. Thus emotiveness is achieved. Compare: This window wont open. This broken window won t open! This goddam window won / open! The underlined word in the third sentence has three stylistic markers in the dictionary: taboo, slang, and intensive. It conveys the authors emotions, his negative attitude towards the object described. So emotive words are also evaluative (rascaF\ ducky) but not all evaluative words should be emotive (good, bad):

To sum up, it should be noted that sometimes it is difficult to draw a hard and fast line

Cni

Aic

Tuka

aH

rAiu

cbko

! m

ob

u

cKap

ojiiHQ

Ul

omou

pKa

of demarcation between logical and emotive emphasis since in real speech they often overlap and colour the whole of the utterance.

As we have seen, special language means make our speech more expressive and emotional. What are, then, expressive means (EMs)? What language media might be termed as EMs? I.R.Galperin gives the following definition: EMs o f a language are those phonetic, morphological, word-building, lexical, phraseological and syntactic forms which exist in language-as-a-system fo r the purpose of logical and/or emotional intensification o f the utterance [154, p. 27]. The words in bold type are important for the understanding of the essence of the notion: these language forms, or patterns, exist in the language, i.e. they are recognized in grammars, dictionaries, courses in phonetics, etc. as having special functions in making the utterances emphatic (cf.: He was an unpleasant person:: He was an extremely unpleasant person). The author/speaker chooses whatever form he prefers or feels to be right/adequate/relevant for the situation described from those linguistic materials available.

The term expressive means is sometimes used interchangeably with the term rhetorical figure (or scheme), more popular in Anglo-American linguistic tradition. The term goes back to classical rhetoric which defined figures of speech as forms artfully varied from common usage (Quintilian). Rhetorical figures (or schemes) are usually described by western linguists as types of arrangement of individual sounds (the level of phonemes), of words (lexical level) and sentences (syntactic level). So, as we see, each level of language has its own arsenal of EMs (or rhetorical figures).

Phonetic EMs are most powerful since the human voice can convey the subtlest nuances of meaning. We can mention here such vocal phenomena (the so-called prosodic means) as pitch, melody, pause, tone, timbre, tempo, etc. To this level scholars usually refer such devices as alliteration, consonance, assonance, onomatopoeia (sound imitation).

To the morphological EMs belong the use of Historical Present, the use of shall with the 2nd person pronoun (You shall be sorry!) to express a warning or threatening and some other devices that alongside their ordinary grammatical functions display a kind of emphasis.

Word-building EMs are forms that intensify some semantic properties of words, such as diminutive suffixes -y (ie), -let, e.g. auntie,

2 6 sonny, starlet.

At the lexical as well as phraseological levels we can single out some layers of words with inner expressiveness such as: Inteijections. They possess only the emotive meaning and are used

to show surprise, anger, etc. ( Oh! Ah! Dear me! Wow!). Words with both the denotative (direct, referential) and connotative

meanings {hate, sympathy, love). Slang, vulgarisms ( get lost = go away). Archaic and poetic words that add a lofty tone to the message, a

tone of solemnity, sophistication or historical colouring ( We are much beholden to you = indebted; morn = morning; billows = waves; bliss = happiness; brow = forehead;/be = enemy; woe = sorrow).

Some types of descriptive/characterising epithets that are emotively charged (a magnificent day).

Set phrases/idioms, catch-words, proverbs. They add an expressive element to the speech (1 .He wants it very much, he simply has his heart set on it. 2. Oh, I don / believe her being indifferent. Absence makes the heart erow fonder. as you know).

Stylistic (or the authors) neologisms (Areyou a stav-up-all-night- erl).

Among syntactical EMs that contribute logical or emotional emphasis to the utterance there are various types of repetition and parallelism. They are all well-recognised constructions used for intensification. ( Scrooge went to bed again, and thought, and thought, and thought it over and over and over - an example from Ch. Dickenss A Christmas Carol).

Expressive means (figures/schemes) should not be confused with stylistic devices (SDs) that are called rhetorical tropes. Such SDs are connected with the figurative language, when a language unit realizes two meanings simultaneously: an ordinary one (lexical or structural) already established in the language-as-a-system and a special one which appears in the text/speech, in the language-in- action (I.R.Galperin). The figurative sense of a word is sometimes called its tropological sense, tropology being the study of tropes [see 122]. So the semantic structure of a word is usually affected in a trope since we use the word in its imaginative, non-literal meaning, usually referred to as transferred'. In fact, as V. A.Kukharenko states, we substitute the existing name of some object by a new, g f

CT

UA

icT

uka

aH

FA

iucb

koi

mo

bu

occasional, individual one, prompted by the speakers imagination, subjective view an d evaluation of things [166, p.37]. For example, the word sun ma y be replaced (substituted) in descriptive con texts by other names, suich as the hot bahI the angry eye, etc., thus various metaphoric imiages being created. This act of name-exchange,o r transference, is actually a type o f intended substitution, a deviation from the common or main sign ificance of a word or phra se, a conscious intensification of some structural and/or semantic projperty o f a neutral or expressive language unit.

The following examples will hel p us see the difference between literal and non-literal, figurative, meanings of a word: (1) Mark is an idle person and (2)i We saw those idle, mountains in the rising sun. In sentence (1) the: word idle is used in its direct, literal meaning - lazy, avoiding work. It might be characterized as a simple descriptive epithet (EMs). In senten ce (2) the word idle is used unusually. The mountains are not pe ople, so they cannot be lazy or avoid working. The: word is used here in its figurative (imaginative, non-literal, transfe rred) meaning thiat appears in the context and is understood only in t hat context. As a result, an unusual bright picture is evoked in the readers mind: the motionless mountains seem to be sleeping, or resting lazily in the sun. It is a metaphor (metaphorical epithet) - a SD called a trope.

So all SDs are based on conscious and intentional intensification of some typical structural and/or semantic property o f a language unit, which can be either neutral or

bee has become a set phrase, a comparative idiom; the metaphoric epithet in the phrase golden locks" has turned into a descriptive cliche through frequent use; the hyperbolic expression Havent seen you for agizs" is not meant to be understood literally or even imaginatively but perceived as a mere conversational formula. On the other hand, one and the same expressi ve means can be used to create different S>Ds. For example, high-flown, formal lexemes often create an official, solemn tone, but in some contexts they can be used to achieve a humorous, ironic or satirical effect (// is so refined, sophisticated! - said about something tasteless, dowdy, insipid). And vice versa, different EMs can take part in creating one SD, such as a pun (play on words), e.g.:

1. a pun bcised on polysemy: How did you like my daughter's singing? What do you think of her execution ? (= performance) - Well, I am in favour o f it}. (= killing as a punishment).

2. a pun based on partial homonymy/homophones: When is a door not a door? When it is ajar ( ajar -= slightly open; a ja r = a glass container).

3. a pun based on the decomposition of phraseological units and set expressions: Why did silly Billy throw the clock out of the window? He wa.nted to see the time fly!

As we have already stated, traditional r hetoric divides all! means of expressiveness into tropes and figures (or schemes), defining the former (tropes) as being means o f figurative usage of language that are mostly expressed by a word or phrase:, and the latter (ligures) as being realized at the level of a sentence or a bigger textu al unit. Hence, to clarify the distinction between them, tropes are sometimes called figures o f thought, while figures proper, or schemes. - figures of speech" [see 122].

To facilitate: the process of differentiating between two major groups of tools of artistic expressiveness (EMs and SDs in his classification), O.M.Morokhovsky suggests the following criteria presented in opposition in the table below [75, p. 45]:

29

CTU

Aic

Tuka

aH

rAiu

cbko

I m

ob

u

9Cap

oAina

Ul

omou

pKQ

EMs SDsLanguage elements of different levels which are stylistically markedl within that level

Ways of combining speech units of a lower level within a uni t of a higher level (e.g. words within a sentence)

The stylist ic meaning of EMs i s registered in dictionaries, grammars, i.e. the language s ystem

The stylistic meaning is generated (appears) in the context

The stylistic meaning is conditioned by the paradigmatic relations of ellcmcnts of one Ieve I

The stylistic meaning i s conditioned by the syntagmatic relations of elements of one or different levels

So, according to Morokhovsky, EMs are mostly paradigmatic, while SD:s are also syntagmatic because they realize their stylistic meaning only in some defi nite context. Let us exemplify this important point. To describe good weather, for example, the writer/ speaker miay use a number of words usually used to d enote various kinds of this climatic phenomenon and choose from ithis paradigm of synony ms:

The weather was *

nice

fine

wonderful, etc.

The paradigm, as is known, is a vertical set of language units of one level (lexical in our example) united on the priinciple of associative s imilarity. Their relations are those of opposition: or - or; the speakeir can choose a word from a paradigm of similar units, the one he/shc believes to be most relevant, appropriate, exact, more expressive., emotionally chairged, or just best suited the; situation.

As far as tropes arc co ncemcd, the writer/speaker also has a number of possibilities from where to choose, so as to foreground some idea and create a new, striking image by deviating from the usual parad igm (The weather was angry/furious.) But in this case the image will be perceived and the idea will be fully understood only at the level of the whole con text where this unit is functioning (for lexical SDs - in our example the word angry (or fiiri ous) - such a higher level is a phrase, a sentence, sometimes a paragraph, or even a text), i.e. at the syntagmatic level. (Syntagma is a linea.r, horizontal set of language units united by the associations of contiguity (and

- and)). So SDs are both paradigmatic and syntagmatic, contextual: the image of the sun as the hot bal l from one of the examples given above w ill not be understood if iit is used separat ely, outside the context (cf.: the hot ball what it is? What sort of a ball? // The hot ball san k below the horizon, and si ion the night fell, not less hot and sultry. The hot ball = the sun).

To 'conclude, all stylistically marked elements must be studied on two levels: paradigmatic

^apo

nina

7

lom

oupx

aLECTURE 3

THE NOTION OF CONTEXT

Types and specifications of linguistic context Extrah'nguisiic context Stylistic context The theory of strong position Meaningfron.t a stylistic viewpoint

o^;r#nnM!ae iiaaaouMMHMMBiaiMBMMMHHMiHi

For its basis tl le theory of contact has the statemen t that tex t (Lat. textus = fabric; interlacing, intertwining, joining) is not a simple linear composition. It is not just many sentences specifically organized (i.e. text cohesion), but a complex unity based on the princi ple of consistent organisation of its message, or content (i.e. text integrity, o*r logical-semantic entity). Text is a structure that is complex in its inner organization, the elements of which are meaningful on their own (as they are) and also in the context, i.e. in their relations with other elements, inc luding extratextu;al ones. The theory of linguistic context (Latin con textus = connecti on, link) was developed by such scientists as John F irth [146], N.N. Amosova [120], G.V.Kolshansky [57-59]. What is a linguistic context1 1t is usually defined as a fragment of a text which contains the language unit chosen for analysis, necessary and adequate for defining the meaning of this unit. Linguistic context helps to determine which of the meanings of a polysemantic word is realized in the text. It comprises the linguistic elements that precede or follow a linguistic form and ensure the text semantic and structural cohesion. It also predetermines the choice of one linguistic form over another, for example, if the sentence does not contain a direct -object, the vfcrb to tell should not be used since it is intransitive, but some other, synonymous, verbs are to be used instead [sec 163, p. 35] So we differentiate between grammatical (morphological, syntactical), lexical and mixed types of context. Besides, context can be left or right (i .e. either preceding or following the unit). Consider some examples:

J. A British subject by birth (=cii*izen);An interesting subject of conversation (= topic);

One s favourite subject at school (= branch of knowledge)The subject of a sentence ( - a notion in grammar)The subiec t-matter (-content of a book/speech)

2. I ll see your house (= have a look at it)I '11 see you to your house (= accomp any you)I see what vou mean ( understand)I ll see to it (= deal with it).

Depending upton its volume, sch olars distinguish between rnicro- contexts and macrocontexts. Microcontext is that minimum context in which the element realizes its meaning and decodes associations, or connotations. Macrocontext is a bigger part of the text which helps to determine the functions o f the element in the whole: text; for example, to single out the key-words olf the text is impossible without taking into consideration the macrooontext. The same iis true for the treatment of symbols in a work of art or all the works of a writer. In this ease: the terms thematic context or megacontext are also used. Thus the boundaries o f micro- and macrocontcx.ts are i-elative. It means they cannot be determined beforehand because they depend upont the aims of thi? investigation and the element o f the analysis ', a word, a phrase, or a sentence. According to some 1 inguists the mean ing of a sentence iis also dc termined by the speech context/discourse. Taken out of discourse, a sentence ceases to be a unit of speech and becomes a unit o f langua.gc [48, p. 335]. (It is a well-known fact that a quotation taken out o f its context can be understood or interpreted as having the meaning; different from or even opposite to what llie author intended to say.) That is why scholars differentiate between such notions as mean,ing and sense. Outside the context, a word/phrase/sentence: has some definite meaning but its sense (including various/possible: implications) may not be clear: its status becomes; similar to that o f a word/phrase in a dictionary (supplied with a number of possible: meanings).

We must also differentiate bet ween linguistic context proper and extralinguistic context. The foiiner, beimg a verbal one, can be opposed to a non-verbal context, i.e. mime, gestures, body lang uage.The latter - the so-called extralinguistic context - is actually the situation of communication, which includes t he conditions, timie and place of communiication (so-called setting ), the participants and their relationship, the objectives of their communication, whether it 3$

CTUA

icTuk

a aH

rAiu

cbko

i m

obu

is written or oral, conducted in ones native language or in a foreign one, etc. Language philosophers and pragmialinguists, most notably J.R. Scarle [quoted in 202, p.45], have defined the extralinguistic contcxt as a set o f background assumptions that are necessary for an utterance to be intelligible. In discourse-oriented approaches to language the cont ext is related to the situation in which an utterance is embedded [ibi

It is believed that cultural knowledge is organized in cognitive models (called prototypes). (It is already a sipherc of cognitive lin- guistics.) For exannple, consider the following sentence: He opened the door and faced a pretty young woman with a dog in her .arms. What kind of a dog would we imagine? Would it be possible to be atn Alsatian or a Collie, or would we think of a Pekinese or some other kind of a small lapdog? The example proves that the cognitive category, or prototype, of a dog in our minds changes and depends on the context of its use [202, p. 43].

The intertextuial context is one more no tion that attracts sichol- airs special attention. M. Bakhtins ideas gave birth to the theory ofi ntertextuality which has been developed by Roland Barthes and J ulia Kristeva. The;ir idea is that all texts are actually intertexts, they echo other texts, themes, ideas. According to R.Barthes, any text i:s a new tissue of p>ast citations [quoted from 160, p. 183], intertex- tuality is a relation of a text with other texts, all those assumptions and expectations tlhat are shared by both writers and readers.

There are also two more specifications o f context that are: usually singled out by scholars: it can be explicit (clearly expressed by b'Oth verbal and mon-verbal means (gestures, mime)) and implicit ( veiled, hidden, noit clearly expressed but only implied). This imiplicit ( implied) context iis one o f the kinds /types of the text category of presupposition. For example, the sentence It has grown colder implies that it was warm some time ago. The use of the word also in the sentence Is Alfred also mad? " presupposes that other people d escribed in that context might be insane too. Presupposition is; usu- ally based on the background knowledge about the situatio n (as the examples above show) or the knowledge about some ge neral socio-cultural, historical and other facts, including minimum literary competence, such as being familiar with the names of well-kmown v/riters and their works (e.g. the names of Agatha Christie or A.rthur Clarke realize the presupposition about the genre). This understanding of implicit context is related to the notion of cultural context discussed above.

Each context, as we have seen, specifies the existing semiantic (both denotational and connotational) possibilities of a word. In semantic actualization of a word the context plays a dual role: cn the 38

CTU

Aic

Tuka

aH

rAiu

cbko

i m

ob

u

one hand, it cuts o ff all meanings irre levant for the given commi rnica- t ivc situation. On t he other, it foregrounds one of the meaningful options of a word, focusing the communicator's attention on one o f the dlcnotational or connotational components of its sema ntic structure [ 166, p. 24], Besides, as V.A.Kukharenko states, it is also capable o f adding new ones, or deviating raither considerably from wlhat is registered in the dictionary. In this respect we can speak about the S'O-called stylistic context. The differ-ence between the linguistic and s,tvlistic contexts w ill be as follows: the linguistic context serves to n eutralize the polysemy of a word, w hereas the stylistic context adds n ew senses, realizes various connotations or creates new meanings o f the word. It can also realize 2 or m ore meanings of the same 'word si multaneously. (e. g.: the stylistic de vice called zeugma is gene:rated b y this type of con text - He lost his heart to her and all his money. The word lost is used in two meanings in one context: 1) to fall im love, 2) to have no longer). The notion of stylistic context and its th cory were developed in the works by such scholars as Yu. Loti nan, Mt.Riffaterre, V.Ku kharcnko and others.

As we have realized, context is the main notion for styl istic analysis, the object of which is the whole text whose separate ele- m ents function together with all othe r text elements of the same and other.levels. To use M.Riffaterres words, language expresses and style stresses. To help the reader be able to understand all possible meanings hidden in the text and to decode the information adcqua tely, this writer places some significant fo r the message textual components in so-called st'rong positions. T he theory of strong position is an essential part of the theory of styliistic context (see the works byI.V. Arnold, V.A.Kukharenko). The strong position is such a place in the text where the significant/important elements o f the na rrative are most conspicuous in a psychological respect. Such strong positions are, primarily, titles, beginnings and endings of the text or its parts (chapters;, stanzas, etc.). Beginnings are usually divided int o two main group s: conventional (ailso called ab ovo, narrat ive, haird) and in-medias-res (soft). The hard, or narrative beginning is, for- example, a tradi tional beginning of fairy-tales or early novels ami stories where th e first lines in the opening answer tlhe questions Who? Where? When? , thus introduc ing for the first time the miain

38 characters and establishing the temporal and space coordinates o f a

narrative compositi on (personage, time and place), e.g.: Once upon a time there lived a king in his kingdom by the sea. The narrative/hard beginnings can be Ifound in some historical novels, in the novels of thic 18 - early 19 centuries, in chronicles, memoirs, tales for children, etc., e.g.: "One summer morning, in the year 1756 /..../ the " Young Rachel", Virginian ship, came up the Avon river ... (ifrom W.M. Thackerays The Virginians). Hard beginnings have gradually grown out of fashion. Nowadays it is typical o f modem prosaic works to have various kinds of soft, or in-medias-res, beginnings (which means beginnings; from the middle). Such beginnings domiinate in the novel of the 19-20 centuries, e.g.: "Dora Greenfield left her husband because she was afraid o f him. She decided six months later to return to him for the same reason (from I. Murdochs; The Bell). In soft beginnings the persona.ges and events are depicted as i f readers were quiite familiar both w ith them and with the situation described. (A typic al characteristic o f such beginnings is the u:se of personal pronouns - I, he, she, they - as antecedents of the pr oper names, i.e. the personages names ap>pear in the text after the u:se of the pronominal substitutes.) Scholars also single out the so-called m-ultimas-res beginnings. In such a case the narrative or play begins al: the actual outco me or ending of 'the story and then proceeds to relate preceding events in non-chronological order.

As regards the text endings, one of the most concise cominen- tairies on the properties and peculiarities of narratives in genera I and emdings in particular, was given by David Lodge. He wrote, Narrative /.../ obtains and holds the interest of its audience by raising questions in their minds about the process it describes, and dela ying the answers to tho:se questions, or raising new questions as ethers airc answered. The questions are of two kinds: what happens next? which generates suspense', and what happened in the past? and why? which generates mystery. When all the quest ions are answered!, the narrative must end. It is characteristic of the modern text, however, that it ends before all the questions are answered" [ 174, p. 14(5],

Thus we may state that stylistics is a di scipline concentrating mostly on connotations, those of styl istically coloured words an d in- n umerable others which words may acquire in the context. So meaning is a notion of paramount importance for stylistics that studies v arious SDs which, as is known, are mainly realized when a twofold a pplication of meaning is obvious. Furthermore, there exist such 7

CTU

Aic

Tuka

aH

rAiu

cbko

i m

ob

u

phenomena as polysemy and polyfunctionality of words. Various meanings o f a polysemantic word used in varying functions have quite different connotations (see Yu.M.Skrebnev). Another difficulty lies in the fact that words (phrases, sentences) do not have immediate and stable connections with ob jects and situations (events) of reality: they only coirrelate in our mirnds with general i deas of objccts and events, i.e. thtey denote whole classes of objects, or in other words, words expresis concepts. (By concept we mean here the general or abstract idea o f some phenomenon of objective reality.) So words are signs that express concepts by .their outerform (symbol - combination of letters) and inner form {meaning).

What is meaning then? This question is easier to ask than to answer. This essential component of words is defi ned by L .Vygotsky [30] as the unity of generalization, communication ana' thinking. Through meaning words commiunicate concepts, thus acq uiring the ability to denote real objects, qualities, actions and abstract notions. Only in a defiinite context (a comcrete speech act)- this or tlhat meaning (or conno tation) of a word can be identified and actualized: a sad man (unhappy); a sad story (pessimistic); a sad stat>e (worthy of criticism); a sad night (poet., arch. - dark, black). [2, p 141]. To quote J.Thomas, making meaning (which is interactive) is a dynamic process involving the negotiation of meaning between the speaker and the hearer, the context of utterance (physic al, social and linguistic) and the meaning potential of an utterance [199, p. 22], Words, as we know, are capable of enrichi ng their semantic structure by acquiring new meamings and losing old ones. This is the subject of lexicology. Stylistics is interested in an almost unlimited potenti ality of words of acquiring new meanings, a quality which is not res tricted to grammatical or semantic acceptability [ 154, p. 63]. RJakobson wrote about the variability :f meanings, their

manifold and far-reaching figurative shifts as the ^properties of lan- i : J guage which induce its creativity', properties that aire called by Gal-

55 * * perin I.R. self-generating [ibid1.., p. 59]. It happens for the reason : 1 already mentioned: since there is: no constant connection, no stable J interdependence between words and the phenomena o f the snrround-

^9; ing world, it is n atural that one and the same object may be called different names by different speakers in different situaitions. It a Iso happens because every phenomenon has a great number of characteristic

3 8 features (besides those referring it to some definite class of

(hat might turn out to be essentiall, more important or conspicuous lor some definite: speaker. We are free to use any denominations that suit our purpose or the situation. For example, a girl might fi gure in spcech, depending upon who is talking and in what communicative situation, as the child, my darling, his dear daughter, honey, that apple-cheeked creature, etc. Moreover, as we have already stated, words and expressions traditionally used with reference to a certain class of objects can be transferred and applied to a represe ntative of quite a different class. The word sad from the example given above might be employed to characterize something unexpe cted: a sad chair. This p hrase will be quite: relevant: and appropriate i n some descriptive contoxt which characterizes, for instance, a pers on in a melancholic mood, or someone who is unhappy and lonely, or tired and frustrated: He took his sad chair and lit a cigarette (the device is callcd hypallag;e [hi'paebebi], or metonyniical/transferred ejpithet). Thus the context is capable of addi ng new meanings (called contextual) to the word and deviating from those registered in the d iction- ary. And this interrelation of various meanings, various assoc iations produce imagery. The wider the gap between the associated objects is, the more strik ing image is creat ed.

Three major types of lexical meaning that take an active part in creating imagery are termed by I.R.Galperin logical, emotive and nominal. Th e interplay of these types o f meaning gives birth to almost all well-k nown stylistic devices:

Logical

Ns econdary

Types of Lexical Meaning

emotive ^ nominal contextual^

nominal

scmot iveprimary logical

Logical mea ning (also called referential, direct, dictionary) is the name of the whole of the concept, the naming (denoting) of the given phenomenon through one o f its qualities [167, p. 17]. Logical meaning is a lhistorical category which changes in the course of time. As a result, one word may denote different concepts, acquiring primary and seco ndary meanings. For example, the word carnage 33

CTU

Aic

Tuka

aH

rAiu

cbko

i m

ob

u

cKap

ojiiH

a SJ

lomou

pKa

has the following meanings (OALD): 1. a vehicle drawn by horses;2. a railway car; 3. transporting goods from one place to another;4. moving part of a machine that supports or moves another part; 5 (dated) way in which somebody holds and moves his head and body. Dictionaries, as a rule, give a list of primary and secondary (derivative) meanings of a word. Additional lexical meanings that words may acquire in the context are not registered in dictionaries. Bom in the context, they are called contextual. For example, the phrase silver dust has acquired an unusual, additional logical meaning in the following context: The sky was sprinkled with silver dust. The words silver dust in this sentence start to mean stars (which resemble silver dust in the authors imagination), thus a metaphoric image being created by the interplay of the logical (fine dry silver powder) and contextual logical (stars) meanings of the lexical components of the phrase employed by the writer.

Emotive meaning (which is actually a connotative component of the semantic structure of a word) expresses feelings and emotions called forth by the object/phenomenon denoted by the word. Its function is to show the speakers subjective attitude to the object spoken of. The emotive meaning in some words coexists with the logical one: smart, sweet, sonny. There are words with a very strong emotive meaning which is fixed in dictionaries with the help of the stylistic marker emot.: e.g. a lot of qualitative or intensifying adjectives (terrifying, spectacular, fabulous, etc.). Besides, there are colloquial intensifies such as ,rawfully , terribly and some other words which even tend to lose their primary logical meaning in a definite context: You are awfully beautiful today! We 're dreadfully sorry. He is tremendously grateful to you! Its terribly good of you! Since their original meanings are almost completely suppressed here by their emphatic function, they start to mean "very. Some words have entirely lost their logical meanings and function in the language as interjections, oaths, exclamatory words (oh, ah, gosh, goodness gracious, etc.). When a word acquires an emotive meaning in a definite context we speak about its contextual emotive meaning. This happens* for example, when we deal with metaphoric epithets: a wooden table - a table made of wood (logical meaning); a wooden face: the contextual emotive meaning underlies the creation of the metaphoric image - a calm or dull or stupid face (depending upon

40 the situation).

Nominal meaning of the word characterizes things or beings. The words with a nominal meaning indicate a particular object out of a class. So they are classified in grammars as proper nouns/names. Usually, nominal meanings have historically developed from logical ones, or in other words, proper names often originated from common nouns (with logical or emotive meanings): Longfellow, Hope, Smith, the Black sea. To distinguish such words we use capital letters (brown- Brown). Sometimes we observe a reverse process when a nominal meaning may acquire a new logical assumption and becomes the basis for a new logical meaning: e.g. Duns Scotus was a medieval scholastic, who happened to be far from wise. From his name a new word was derived - dunce, which started to mean a dullard, a stupid person". The words sandwich ", boycott" exemplify the same mechanism.

Logical meaning

A new logical meaning

(a new common noun)

It is a historical process. But when a writer/speaker resorts to that mechanism of name-transference, we deal with the cases of new contextual logical meanings and new contextual nominal meanings being created in some definite context for stylistic purposes. Let us look at the examples.

The SDs called speaking/telling, or telltale, or token names " and antonomasia " (the Greek naming instead) are based on the process shown schematically above. If the name-transference follows Ihe first step in our graph, i.e. a common noun is used in the context in its new (contextual) nominal meaning (as if it were a proper name), we deal with the speaking name, a device employed by authors lo characterize their personages: Lady Fury, Mr Coward. If proper names acquire new contextual logical meanings, we speak about the 41

(common noun)

Nominal meaning (proper name)

CTU

Aic

Tuka

aH

rAiu

cbko

i m

ob

u

use of antonomasia [aentsna'meizis], which can be of two types: metonymic: He bought a Picasso! (= a picture painted by Picasso) and metaphoric: You are a real Byron! (= a brilliant poet) (mind the use of articles).

To conclude, the role of context is most important in both meaning and sense realization but its significance is not as great in the sphere of stylistic connotations of words that already possess them (marked in dictionaries) and enter the context already being con- notatively charged. But before proceeding to the discussion of such groups of the English vocabulary, a few words should be said about the main varieties of a national language in general.

QUESTIONS FOR SELF-CONTROL:

1. What do you know about the theory of linguistic context? Give examples ofvarious types of context.

2. Dwell upon the notion of extralinguistic context and specifications of culturalcontext

3. What is implicit context?4. What is the difference between linguistic and stylistic contexts?5. Why do you think text beginnings and endings are called strong positions?6. What types of lexical meaning do you know? What is a contextual meaning?

LECTURE 4STYLISTIC DIFFERENTIATION OF THE ENGLISH VOCABULARY

National language. Modern varieties of English Bookish vs colloquial English Uterary and colloquial strata of words Special literary words Special colloquial words Stylistic coinages

iimm iiiiiinnin 11 ii i i

English as a national language exists in two major varieties- literary and non-literary, or dialects. Each of these two varieties of the national language, in its turn, can be divided into two more types, all of which are presented in the scheme that follows:

National language

Literary language ............................................................. Dialects

Bookish................. Colloquial < ---------------- Social

(formal) \ S ' (informal) (jargons)

Local

(territorial

vernaculars)

The literary language is a historical category. It obeys definite phonetic, morphological, lexical, syntactic, stylistic norms recognized as standards and serves the state, administrative and cultural needs of the nation at a given period of time. (The term literary language should not be confused with the term the language of literature - here we deal only with the belles-lettres style). Literary English is sometimes called educated or standard English. It is used by the majority of educated people in speaking and writing.It is uniform-national, not limited socially or geographically (cf.: wee (Scottish colloquial) - small (GB)). The existence of literary standards in language helps to cause its uniformity and its greater stability. But these standards undergo gradual changes, they develop | |

CT

UA

icT

uka

aH

rAiu

cbko

i m

ob

u

and improve. Besides, there is no hard and fast division between the literary and non-literary language varieties. They depend on each other. On the one hand, the literary language constantly enriches its vocabulary and forms from the resources of vernaculars (because of this interaction there appear lexical and grammatical doublets, and the language standards become unstable). On the other hand, the literary language influences the non-literary language. As Helen Gardener, an art historian and educator, once aptly remarked, the knowledge of literature and literary language enables us to discover standards of permanence which can save us from the domination offashion.

As is seen from the scheme, the literary language exists in two constantly interacting functional varieties - bookish (formal) and colloquial (informal/non-formal). They both might be found either in the written or oral forms. True, most literary bookish messages appear in writing, but an informal letter, a diary, a novel, a play or even a modem poem (that is a written text) may include passages or words typical of the spoken/colloquial language. And vice versa: an oral speech (a public address, report, lecture) usually has every characteristic of the bookish language variety. In the paragraphs that follow some general characteristics of these two varieties are presented (mostly based on I.R.Galperins and V. V.Buzarovs works [1 5 4 ; 1 3 2 ]) .

Literary bookish English is nearly always written, except when used in formal public speeches, broadcast talks, prepared lectures, etc. (Here the communication is in the form of a monologue and often prepared in advance.) It is the type of language taught at school and universities and generally used by press, radio and television. It is also used by educated people in formal situations, in literary prose, in official reports, scholarly articles, theses and reviews, scientific textbooks and essays, formal correspondence and business letters. Thus, written English is typically used in formal contexts, being informative and discursive. Unlike the spoken language, the written one changes more slowly and is therefore far more conservative and homogeneous.

Although there are a lot of common features between formal written and informal spoken English, there are also very many differences (both in vocabulary and grammar).The most striking difference lies in the vocabulary used. The vocabulary of the written

4 4 language includes a large number of abstract and international words,

scientific, technical and political terms. The grammar is generally closely organized and complex. It may make use of long sentences with several levels of subordination; it also prefers sentences with non-finite constructions (infinitival, gerundial and participial) which serve as a certain means of informational condensation. The arrangement of sentences is by no means accidental. Each sentence is logically connected with those preceding and following it, thus forming a syntactical whole (a paragraph). Contractions and other conversational forms and structures are out of place here. Another syntactic peculiarity of the written style is that it prefers hypotactic constructions (i.e. with subordination) to paratacti