The Book Stylistics by Galperin. Uploaded by Alexei Galaktionov. Copyright: Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC). Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online. English Stylistics has 38 ratings and 2 reviews. The textbook discusses the general problem of style, gives a stylistic classification of English vocabul. About I.R. Galperin: Ilya Romanovich Galperin ( – ) was a notable linguist, professor of the Moscow State Linguistic University.. I.R. Galperin.
|Published (Last):||26 July 2012|
|PDF File Size:||14.68 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||3.19 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Interjections and Exclamatory Words Decomposition of Set Phrases Chiasmus Reversed Parallel Construction Free Verse and Accented Verse Stylistics, sometimes called lingvo-stylisticsis a branch of general linguistics. It has now been more or less definitely outlined. It deals mainly with two interdependent tasks: The two objectives of stylistics are clearly discernible as two separate fields of investigation.
The inventory of special language media can be analyzed and their ontological features revealed stlistics presented in a galperih in which the co-relation between the media becomes evident. The types of texts can be analyzed if their linguistic components are presented in their interaction, thus revealing the unbreakable unity and transparency of constructions of a given type.
The types of texts that are distinguished by the pragmatic aspect of the communication are called functional styles of language FS ; the special media of language which secure the desirable effect of the utterance are called stylistic devices SD and expressive means EM. The first field of investigation, i.
SDs and EMs, necessarily touches upon such general language problems as the aesthetic function of language, synonymous ways of rendering one and the same idea, emotional colouring in language, the interrelation between language and thought, the individual manner of an author in making use of language and a number of other issues. The second field, i.
In dealing with the objectives of stylistics, certain pronouncements of adjacent disciplines such as theory of information, literature, psychology, logic and to some extent statistics must be touched upon. This is indispensable; for nowadays no science sgylistics entirely isolated from other domains of human knowledge; and linguistics, particularly its branch stylistics, cannot avoid references to the above mentioned disciplines because it is confronted with certain overlapping issues.
The branching off of stylistics in language science was indirectly the result of a long-established tendency of grammarians to confine their investigations to sentences, clauses and word-combinations which are “well-formed”, to use a dubious term, neglecting anything that did not fall under the recognized and received standards. This tendency became particularly strong in what is called descriptive linguistics.
The generative grammars, which appeared as a reaction against descriptive linguistics, have confirmed that the task of any grammar is to limit the scope of investigation of. Everything that fails to meet this requirement should be excluded from linguistics. But language studies cannot avoid subjecting to observation any language data whatever, so where grammar refuses to tread stylistics steps in.
Stylistics has acquired its own status with its own inventory of tools SDs and EMswith its own object of investigation and with its own methods of research. The stylistics of a highly developed language stylistixs English or Russian has brought into the science of language a separate body of media, thus widening the range of observation of phenomena in language.
The significance of this branch of linguistics can hardly be over-estimated. A number of events in the development of stylistics must be mentioned here as landmarks. Secondly, a conference on Style in Language was held at Indiana University in the spring offollowed by the publication of the proceedings of this conference under the editorship of Thomas Sebeok. At this conference lines were drawn along which galperkn in lingvo-stylistics might be maintained.
An interesting symposium was also held in Italy, the proceedings of which were published under the editorship of professor S.
Chat man in A great number of monographs, sttlistics, articles, and dissertation papers are now at the disposal of a scholar in stylistics. The stream of information grows larger every month.
Two American journals appear regularly, which may keep the student informed as to trends in the theory of stylistics. They are Style issued at the Arkansas University U. See also the bibliography on p. It is in view of the ever-growing significance of the exploration of language potentialities that so much attention is paid in lingvo-stylistics to the analysis of expressive means EMs and stylistic devices SDsto their nature and functions, to their classification and to possible interpretations of additional meanings they may carry in a message as well as their aesthetic value.
In order to ascertain the borders of stylistics it is necessary to go at some length into the question of what is style. Now the word ‘style1 is used in so many senses that it has become a breeding ground for ambiguity.
[Galperin] Stylistics(Book Fi org) | Екатерина Горбачевская –
The word is applied to the teaching of how to write a composition see below ; it is also used to reveal the correspondence between thought and expression; it frequently denotes an individual manner of making use of language.
All these ideas directly or indirectly bear on issues in stylistics. Some of them become very useful by revealing the springs which make our utterances emphatic, effective and goal-directed.
It will therefore not come amiss to quote certain interesting observations regarding style made by different writers from different angles.
Some of these observations are dressed up as epigrams or sententious maxims like the ones quoted above. Here are some more of them. Thus Michael Riffaterre writes that “Stylistics will be a linguistics of the effects of the message, of the output of the act of communication, of its attention-compelling function”. Language, being one of the means of communication or, to be exact, the most important means of communication, is regarded in the above quotation from a pragmatic point of view.
Stylistics in that case is regarded as a language science which deals with the results of the act of communication. To a very considerable degree this is true.
Galperin I. A. Stylistics
Stylistics must take into consideration the “output of the act of communication”. But stylistics must also investigate the ontological, i. Hill states that “A current definition of style and stylistics is that structures, stylisticz, and patterns which extend, or may extend, beyond the boundaries of individual sentences define style, and that the study of them is stylistics. The truth of this approach to style and stylistics lies in the fact that the author concentrates on suchphenomena in language as present a system, in other words, on facts which are not stylistis to individual use.
The most frequent definition of style is one expressed by Seymour Chatman: This definition indirectly deals with the idiosyncrasies peculiar to a given writer. Somehow it fails to embrace such phenomena in text structure where the ‘individual’ is reduced to the minimum or even done away with entirely giving preference to nonindividualistic forms in using language means.
However, this definition is acceptable when applied to the ways men-of-letters use language when they seek to make it conform to their immediate aims and purport.
A somewhat broader view of style is expressed by Werner Winter who maintains that “A style may be said to be characterized by a pattern of recurrent selections from the inventory of optional features of a language.
Various types of selection can be found: The idea of taking various types of selection as criteria for distinguishing styles seems to be a sound one. It places the whole problem on a solid foundation of objective-criteria, namely, the interdependence of optional and obligatory features. There is no point in quoting other definitions of style.
They are too many and too heterogeneous to fall under one more or less satisfactory unified notion. Undoubtedly all these diversities in the understanding of the word ‘style’ stem from its ambiguity. But still all these various definitions leave impression that by and large they all have something in common. Atylistics of them4 point to some integral significance, namely, that style is a set of characteristics by which we distinguish one author from another or members of one subclass from members of other subclasses, all of which are members-of the same general gaperin.
Another point the above quotations have in common is that all of them concentrate on the form of the expression almost to the detriment of the content.
Galperin I. A. Stylistics
In other words, style is regarded as something that belongs exclusively to the plane of expression and not to the plane ‘of content. The evaluation is also based on whether the choice of language means conforms with the most general pattern of the given type of text—a novel, a poem, a letter, a document, an article, an essay and so on.
It follows then that the term ‘style’, being ambiguous, needs a restricting adjective to denote what particular aspect of style we intend to deal with. It is suggested here that the term individual style should be applied to that sphere of linguistic and literary science which deals with the peculiarities of a writer’s individual manner of using lan.
The idiolect should be distinguished from what we call, individual style, inasmuch as the word ‘style’ presupposes a deliberate choice. When Buffon coined his famous saying which, due to its epigrammatical form, became a by-word all over the world, he had in mind the idiolect, i.
All these factors are, however, undoubtedly interwoven with individual style. A man’s breeding and education will always affect his turn of mind and therefore will naturally be revealed in his speech and writing. But a writer with a genuine individual style will as much as possible avoid those language peculiarities which point to his breeding and education in order to leave room for that deliberate choice of language means which will secure the effect sought.
It follows then that the individual style of a writer is marked by its uniqueness. It can be recognized by the specific and peculiar combination of language media and stylistic devices which in their interaction present a certain system.
This system derives its origin from the creative spirit, and elusive though it may seem, it can nevertheless be ascertained.
Naturally, the individual style gal;erin a writer will never be entirely independent of the literary norms and canons of the given period. When we read novels by Swift or Fielding we can easily detect features common to both writers. These features are conditioned by the general. But the adaptations of these canons will always be peculiar and therefore distinguishable.
Alexander Blok said that the style of a writer is so closely connected with the content of his soul, that the experienced eye can see the soul through his style, and by studying the form penetrate to the depth of the content.
To analyze the form in order to discover the idiosyncrasies of a writer’s style is not an easy, but a rewarding task. Approaches to components of individuality such as 1 composition of larger-than-the sentence units see p. The language of a writer is sometimes regarded as alien to lingvo-stylistics. Here is what V. If analyzed outside the problem of style the style of the work, the writer, the literary trend or the literary erathe language falls into a mass of.
However, observations of the ways language means are employed by different writers, provided no claim is made to defining the individual style as a whole, may greatly contribute to the investigation of the ontological nature of these means by throwing light on their potentialities and ways of functioning. The individuality of a stypistics style is shown in a peculiar treatment of language means. In shylistics connection it is styllistics referring to Flaubert’s notion on style.
Middleton Murry who said that “A true style must be unique, if we understand by the phrase ‘a true style’ a completely adequate expression in language of a writer’s mode of feeling. In discussing the problem of individual style let us make it clear from the outset that the problem itself is common ground for literature and linguistics.
However, in as much as language is the only media to accommodate poetic messages, it is necessary to go at some length into the domain of individual style, it being the testing ground for language means. The individual style of an author is frequently identified with the general, generic term ‘style’.
But as has already been pointed out, style is a much broader notion. The individual style of an author is only one of the applications of the general term ‘style’.
The analysis of an author’s language seems to be the most important procedure in estimating his individual style. This is obvious not only because language is the only means available to convey the author’s ideas to the reader in precisely the way he intends, but also because writers unwittingly contribute greatly to establishing the norms of the literary language of a given period. In order to compel the language to serve tsylistics purpose, the writer draws on its potential resources in a way different from what we see in ordinary speech.