doc. PhDr. Ludmila Urbanová,
CSc.
Katedra anglistiky a amerikanistiky
Filozofická fakulta
Masarykovy univerzity
Is Stylistics a
Controversial Branch of Language Study?
1 Key Notions of
Stylistics
Stylistics has been considered “a developing and controversial field of study” (Crystal and Davy, 1969, vii) for several decades. The existing approaches to stylistic analysis are numerous and diverse, causing difficulties to a researcher striving to apply methods of stylistic analysis and to draw distinct lines of demarcation between them. As aptly pointed out by Hoffmannová (1997.5), stylistics is a field of study which is not only highly interdisciplinary but also considerably eclectic.
In my contribution I will make an attempt at surveying some of the key features generally associated with the concept of style. Factors determining the use of language, such as variation, distinctiveness and choice will be questioned against the diverse concepts of stylistics and style current in British and Czech literature on the subject.
At the same time, discrepancies in the understanding of the terms style and register will be clarified. The terms are neither identical nor interchangeable, each of them providing a different evaluation of style-constituting properties.
Since foreign learners cannot rely on their intuition, it is inevitable to cultivate their stylistic awareness, both in the theoretical aspects and practical application (cf. Crystal and Davy 1969). In my considerations I will try to answer the question posed by Enkvist (1964.3): “What must we do to give the students of a foreign language a sense of style in that language”?
2 Functional
Interpretation of Style
The functional approach to style is a common point of departure in both Czech and British linguistic traditions: each style fulfills a specific function in the social context. In this respect, similar standpoints can be traced in the interpretation of style and stylistics by the Prague School (Mathesius 1982), in the functionalism of Halliday (1994), in the theoretical preliminaries of the founders of British linguistic stylistics Crystal and Davy (1969) and in the theoretical views adopted by Fowler (1996) as a representative of critical discourse analysis.
However, the delimitation of style as well as the choice of respective terminology to cover this field of study has been entirely different in the Czech linguistic thinking and in the English tradition. In British sources the basic notion in stylistics is no longer termed style; in contemporary works devoted to stylistic aspects the basic notion is that of register.
3 The Notion of Style in
British and Czech Linguistic Tradition
In Crystal´ s reference book A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics stylistics is defined as “a branch of linguistics which studies the features of SITUATIONally distinctive uses (VARIETIES) of LANGUAGE, and tries to establish principles capable of accounting for particular choices made by individual and social groups in their use of language”(1992.332). All the three key features which are considered highly relevant with regard to style, variation, distinctiveness and choice, are incorporated in this definition. In this dictionary the term style, however, is not recognized as an independent entry suitable to serve as a technical term.
Fowler (1966.15) originally gives the following definition of style: “Style - a property of all texts, not just literary - may be said to reside in the manipulation of variables in the structure of a language, or in the selection of optional or ´latent’ features”.
In his later evaluation, Fowler (1996.185) rejects the term style as a working term, arguing that it lacks precision. He claims that "the word has an inevitably blurring effect, because the kinds of regularities referred to are so diverse in their nature". Although style has been re-defined by him as "a recognizable and characteristic way of doing something", such delimitation is too broad to be called a definition. Instead, Fowler prefers the sociolinguistic term register. In Fowler´ s definition "a register is [...] a distinctive use of language to fulfill a particular communicative function in a particular kind of situation [...] (1996.191). A sociolinguistic term has been chosen, which seems to be better suited to the phenomenon of style which is socially determined.
In the
v každé se obráží aktuální postoj mluvčího ke skutečnosti, kterou promluva vyjadřuje, a jeho vztah k posluchači, ať skutečnému, nebo myšlenému"(1982.93).
[Every utterance has its own referential content and stems from a particular situation in which the current attitude of the speaker to the reality expressed by the utterance is reflected, together with the attitude to the concrete or envisaged hearer”; translated into English by L.U.]
The stress on the fact
that every utterance stems from a particular situation gives evidence of the
contextual approach adopted by the
[A language style [...] is
a method of goal-oriented choice and arrangement (organisation) of language
means which is applied in the making of the text; in the final product it is
thus reflected as the principle of organizing language units which, out of
parts and details, shapes
a unity compatible with the communicative
intention of the author“; translated into English by L.U.]
3.1 Variation
In contemporary linguistics language is considered to be a heterogeneous phenomenon whose major characteristic feature is that of variation: “It is generally accepted nowadays by linguists of all theoretical persuasions that there is, in reality, no such thing as a homogeneous, stylistically and socio-expressively undifferentiated language system” (Lyons 1995.340).
In British linguistics two types of variation in language are generally acknowledged: variations as to the use in social situations and variations according to the user.
The first type of variation is called register. Crystal´ s definition of the term register stresses its conditioning by the social situation in which a variety appears: “[...] the term refers to a VARIETY of LANGUGE defined according to its use in social SITUATIONS...”
Fowler´ s definition of the register lays stress on the context in which it is used: “Varieties of a language according to the use to which it is being put, and the context in which it is uttered, are known as registers” (1996.33). Thus it is the use which is the centre of attention of language scholars in the study of registers.
In his interpretation of
the varieties of English,
Example 1
Notwithstanding the termination
of the hiring under Clause 6 the Hirer shall pay all rent accrued due in
respect of the hiring up to the date of such termination and shall be or remain
liable in respect of any damage caused to the Owner by reason of any breach by
the Hirer of any stipulation herein contained and on part of the Hirer to be
performed or observed. (
The second type of variation which is called a personal dialect represents the user´ s individual variety called idiolect. It is shaped primarily by the regional and social characteristics of the speaker, the most decisive factor being considered his/her education. The idiolect of the speaker is manifested in his/her pronunciation variety, lexical choices and grammatical patterns and reflects social class.
Example 2
“We´re just gonna sneak up
on ol´Leroy. Probably he think it gonna be Shirlene at the door. I just hope he
don´t come to the door too happy, you know what I mean?”
(Evanovich, J: Three to Get Deadly. Introducing Great New Books from Penguin.1997.23)
3.2 Distinctiveness
Distinctions between the
choices made by the speaker in rendering the message are due, among other
things, to the functions of language which prevail in the given discourse. A
style in which the referential function
prevails (matter-of-fact style, in Czech věcný styl) differs considerably from
the style in which the expressive and
the conative functions are dominant.
Holmes (1992.14) tackles the relationship between the referential content and
the affective content of the message and states that the two components are
mutually interrelated. If the content of the message is mainly referential, it
is less affective, and vice versa.
Example 3
So language can be seen as distinctive because of its intricate association with the human mind and with human society. It is related to both cognition and communication. (Widdowson, H.G.: Linguistics. 1996.15)
Example 4
I´ve done this with kids at school not the same as I this but you know my dread is always hearing what you have said because I think your own voice sounds horrible (S.1.7 154-160)
3.3. Choice
Characterizing the choice the user has in expressing himself/herself, we usually have in mind the meaning potential of a particular language. Style can be defined as choice from linguistic possibilities. The meaning potential consists of the means already existing in the language as well as the means which can potentially come into being. This process is called re-accentuation through which new meanings are created on the basis of new contextual specifications.
Example 5
Lady Caroline: You have no country houses , I am told, in
Hester: We have not many.
Lady Caroline: Have you any country? What
we should call country?
Hester: We have the largest country
in the world, Lady Caroline. They used to tell us at school that some of our states are
as big as
(Wilde, O.: A Woman of No Importance. Penguin Popular Classics 1996.1)
4
Contrastive Approaches to Stylistic Analysis
In contemporary British stylistics two contrastive approaches to stylistic analysis are distinguished. It can be argued that each of them brings valuable observations about the way language is organized in different styles.
The first approach can be called traditional. The text is viewed as a final product of the producer´s activity: “Style, viewed as a particular choice of language made by an author, in a sense embodies that author´s achievement, and way of experiencing and interpreting the world” (Leech et al. 1982.158).
A more recent approach understands the text as a dynamic entity in which the meanings are unfolded and discovered by the recipient in the process of its interpretation. The change of perspective is connected with the distinction between text and discourse.
Fowler (1996.111) specifies the text in the following way: “To look at language as text entails the study of whole units of communication seen as coherent syntactic and semantic structures which can be spoken or written down”.
The discourse, however, is
not only a language product, it reflects extra-linguistic
factors: “Discourse is the whole complicated process of linguistic interaction between people uttering and comprehending texts. To study language as discourse requires, therefore, attention to facets of structure which relate to the participants in communication, to the actions they perform through uttering texts, and to the contexts within which the discourse is conducted (1996.111).
4.1 Text as Product
In the text-as-product view, the text as a coherent piece of language is analysed from bottom to top, according to the individual levels of language seen in their interrelation (see Crystal and Davy 1969). In this view the text is interpreted as static.
Bakhtin mentions a passive understanding in which the actual meaning of the utterance is not grasped: “A passive understanding of linguistic meaning is no understanding at all, it is only the abstract aspect of meaning” (1994.281).
In this method of analysis the investigation of spoken language usually starts at the phonetic/ phonological level. In written language the graphetic/graphological devices are analysed. Other levels of analysis comprise the grammatical, lexical and semantic levels. The final description is presented as a mosaic of stylistic markers constituting the style.
4.2 Discourse
as Process
Another possible angle from which a style can be analysed is a discourse-as-process view. The style is seen as an entity dependent on the process of interaction between the producer and the recipient. In Bakhtin´ s view, the text is based on dialogism: “Responsive understanding is a fundamental force, one that participates in the formulation of discourse, and it is moreover an active understanding [...]” (1994.280). The text is thus seen as a contextually determined entity which is shared by the producer and the recipient and the interpretation of which remains open.
The notion of interactive meaning is explained by Thomas: “[...] meaning is not something which is inherent in the words alone, nor is it produced by the speaker alone, nor by the hearer alone. Making meaning is a dynamic process, involving the negotiation of meaning between the speaker and the hearer, the context of utterance (physical, social and linguistic) and the meaning potential of an utterance” (1995.22)
5 Stylistically
Significant Features
Styles differ according to features which influence the speaker´ s /writer´ s choice of means of expression. In this brief overview the most relevant features having a direct bearing on the delimitation of styles will be discussed. Halliday (1978) has introduced three concepts which are crucial in the interpretation of messages, namely field, tenor and mode. These concepts have been used as reliable indicators of stylistic differences. Field, tenor and mode are factors influencing the choice of language means and posing limitations on the repertoire of phonological, grammatical and lexical devices.
5.1 Field
Field of discourse (or field) entails “a classification
of REGISTERS in terms of subject-matter” (
Everyday topics in face-to-face conversation are characterized by the use of basic vocabulary. Grammatical structures tend to be simple, elliptical, or incomplete. Frequent reductions of the sound structure (contracted forms, assimilations etc.) are manifestations of the style of speaking which is called casual or relaxed.
Example 6
it´s just the shop on the bridge just does everything cheaper I mean you know it´s got everything if ever you wanted some parts of this I would always try it (S.1.7 855-859)
Sophisticated topics in such areas of human activity as science and law require the use of elaborate means of expression with regard to vocabulary, grammar and phonological structure. The stratification of English vocabulary according to its origin is matched by the triple synonymy distinction revealing semantic and stylistic differentiation.
In covering sophisticated topics long, polysyllabic words of foreign origin having a high degree of abstraction dominate. The grammatical structure of elaborate styles is thorough, complete and precise. Cohesive devices are important signals of textual unity and indicate the crucial points in the structure of the text.
Example 7
All the text types listed in the first paragraph fit the characterisation of text as visible evidence of a purposeful interaction between writers and readers. Thus at one extreme an academic textbook is the visible evidence of an interaction between an academic and undergraduates, in which the academic seeks to encapsulate the state of knowledge in a particular discipline in order that the undergraduates may have a coherent overview of the discipline and be able to place any particular aspect of the discipline within the larger whole. (Hoey, M: Textual Interaction. Routledge 2003.11)
5.2 Tenor
The term tenor indicates the relationship between the participants in discourse. From the sociolinguistic point of view, the interlocutors are characterized according to whether they show solidarity or distance, according to their status reflecting power relations which can be either symmetrical or asymmetrical, and with regard to the level of formality which they have adopted in their communication (cf. Holmes 1992). In Example 8 below the speakers show solidarity, equality and informality.
Example 8
A and what I like about it is it´s not all new branded stuff but it´s not
all rubbish
B yeah (S.1.7 871-874)
In Example 9 the relationship between the interlocutors in conversation is asymmetrical
(an academic talking to a prospective
undergraduate). Distance and formality are manifested in the choice of devices,
e.g. the passive construction and vague specifications.
Example 9
B I mean you are aware that in taking English as an
academic subject rather than a shall I
say a cultural subject that a good
deal of linguistic study is involved
A yes (S.3.1 708-712)
5.3 Mode
The term mode is delimited
by
The traditional division into spoken mode and written mode has been kept. However, there is a strong tendency in present usage to dissolve this dichotomy and produce types of communication which are hybrid in the sense that features of both modes are merged (advertisements, chats, talk-shows, e-mails etc.).
The distinction between speaking and writing is based on a different hierarchy of language functions which operate in these modes. Spoken language is characterized by a strong presence of expressive and conative elements, whereas written language is closely connected with the “intellectual content” (Vachek 1976.414). In Halliday´s view, the distinction between speech and writing can be explained as the difference between a process (speech) and a product (writing). Halliday claims that “writing exists, whereas speech happens” (1994.xxii).
5.3.1 Spoken Language
The distinction which is made when studying spoken language concerns the dichotomy private vs. public. The existence of corpora (e.g. A Corpus of English Conversation, the Spoken English Corpus, British National Corpus) make it possible to study long stretches of authentic conversation representing impromptu speech.
Private conversation (face-to-face conversation) is unprepared and produced on the spot. It is loosely structured and organized in long clause-complexes (cf. Halliday 1990). In private conversation interlocutors show a high degree of involvement and subjectivity, attitudinal meanings are prevalent.
Example 10
B it´s the thing I have against the picture
club that they are many of them are competent people´s failures you know canvasses
which ought to have been thrown away have been lent to the picture club I mean
it´s not the sort of thing you don´t want to be inspired by somebody´s horrors
A no you want something round you when you think it when
you look at it you think oh yes don´t you you don´t always want to be re-making
the picture that´s what I´ve been doing
(S.1.8 160-172)
Public speaking style is largely connected with the media. A passage from the transcript of the interview below features Larry King and Arnold Schwarzenegger in a political interview on CNN. Public speaking style (e.g. an interview on the radio or a panel discussion on television) is rather impersonal and detached, using vague and impersonal expressions.
Example 11
King: Does it bother you, though,
that some elements in the state will
be forced to vote
differently than others, that people will have to deal with chads and
the kind of confusion
Schwarzenegger: Well, no, I mean, the thing
is that it´s the very same system
that has elected Davis and Bustamante the last time, so how bad can it be,
right? I mean, it´s the same system,
so why change it now? So I think they should move forward. I think that we have
to listen to what the people want.
And the people very clearly, have said we want to have a recall. I think if
you look at the polls, that 55 to 60 percent of the people who say they want to have a recall. So I think it will
be a mistake, like I said, you know, to now change
that. For me, in my mind, you know, there´s... (CNN, Larry King Live, aired
5.3.2 Written Language
The difference between spoken and written language can be seen in three significant aspects: structure, content and the character of communication.
In writing the linear development and fluency are dominant discourse features, whereas in speaking the “circular” character of the message can be observed: the topic(s) are recurrent. The language is characterized by normal non-fluency (Crystal-Davy 1969.104). Written messages are more compact and condensed (Vachek 1976.337-352), brevity of expression is
expected.
The content of the message in the written form is more intellectual (Vachek 1976. 414), due to the planned activity and careful choice of the language means by the writer. The writer is matter-of-fact, more formal and more abstract compared with the speaker.
In conclusion it can be stated that written language is static, whereas spoken language is dynamic. Written texts are planned, finished products, while spoken communication is an ongoing process which is usually unprepared, or partly prepared.
Example 12
Written language
Present-day
(The Book of London 1987)
Example 13
Spoken language
A but I think
B not at all not oh
A yes I think it´s very bad for you know your general
tone of living in
6 Domain
and Province
The content of the message is closely connected with another term which is sociolinguistic in nature, namely domain. This term is defined as “a group of institutionalised social situations typically constrained by a common set of behavioural rules” (Crystal 1992.112). In certain situations certain types of speech behaviour are expected from the user as part of the social norm.
The term domain is
comparable, though not identical, with the term province which is defined “with reference to the kind of
occupational or professional activity being engaged in” (
In English the process of codification is natural, no institutional codification has taken place and all the sources which deal with the norm (dictionaries, grammar books, stylistic manuals etc.) are thus merely descriptive. Czech language, on the other hand, has undergone institutional codification and the norm is prescribed to its users.
7 Category of Formality
Formality is a sociolinguistic category which has been defined as “a level of language considered APPROPRIATE to socially formal situations” (Crystal 1992.141). A socially formal situation is reflected in social distance, impersonality, a high degree of politeness, lack of imposition in speech and writing, as shown in the example below.
Example 14
Lady Hunstanton: Dear Caroline, how kind of you! I think we all do fit in very nicely together. And I hope our charming American visitor will carry back pleasant recollections of our English country life.
(O. Wilde: A Woman of No Importance. Penguin Popular Classics 1996.3)
On the contrary, informality is “a style of writing or conversational speech characterized by simpler grammatical structures, more familiar vocabulary, and greater use of idioms and metaphors” (entry definition in The New Oxford Dictionary of English).
Example 15
“Had his head screwed on,
whoever he was. I read it in the paper somewhere. There´s no
such thing as a free lunch”.
(Lodge, D.: Nice Work. Penguin Books 1988.116)
8 Acceptability and Appropriateness
Crystal and Davy stress linguistic awareness and linguistic appropriateness with regard to style and claim that “The native speaker of English of course has a great deal of intuitive knowledge about linguistic appropriateness and correctness - when to use one variety of language rather than another - which he has amassed over the years” (1969.5), while the foreign learner has “no intuitive sense of linguistic appropriateness in English at all: he has no awareness of conventions of conformity, because he has not grown up in the relevant linguistic climate”(1969.6). Manuals of English style stress the need for intelligibility and clarity of expression. Fowler& Fowler (1970.11) emphasize that the writer should be “direct, simple, brief, vigorous and lucid”.
The most demanding stylistic aspects for Czech learners of English are the distinction between formality and informality in discourse, use of politeness strategies, use of indirect speech acts and the distinction between nominal and verbal ways of expression.
Literature Cited
Bakhtin, M.: The Dialogic
Imagination.
Crystal, D.: The English Language. Penguin Books 1988
Crystal, D.: A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics. 3rd edition. Blackwell 1992
Crystal, D. and Davy, D.: Investigating English Style. Longman 1969
Čechová, M., Chloupek, J., Krčmová, M. and Minářová, E.: Stylistika současné češtiny. Praha 1997
Enkvist, N.E., Spencer, J. and Gregory, M.J.: Linguistics and Style.
Fowler, R.: Linguistic Theory
and the Study of Literature. In: Ed. Fowler, R.: Essays on Style and
Language.
Fowler, R.: Linguistic Criticism.
2nd ed.
Fowler and Fowler: King´s
English.
Halliday, M.A.K.: Language as
Social Semiotic. Edward Arnold 1978
Halliday, M.A.K.: Spoken and
Written Language.
Halliday, M.A.K.: An Introduction to Functional Grammar. 2nd ed. Edward Arnold 1994
Hoey, M.: Textual Interaction. Routledge 2003
Hoffmannová, J.: Stylistika
a..... Trizonia 1997
Holmes, J.: An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Longman 1992
Leech, G., Deuchar, M. and Hoogenraad, R.: English Grammar for Today. Macmillan 1982
Leech, G.: Principles of Pragmatics. Longman 1990
Lyons, J.: Linguistic
Semantics.
Mathesius, V.: Řeč a sloh. In: Mathesius, V.: Jazyk, kultura, slovesnost. Odeon 1982
Ed. Pearsall, J.: The New
Ed. Svartvik, J. and Quirk, R.: A
Corpus of English Conversation.
Thomas, J.: Meaning in Interaction. Longman 1995
Urbanová, L. and
Vachek, J.: Selected Writings in English and General Linguistics. Praha 1976
Widdowson, H.G.: Linguistics.