[alert-primary] Stylistics and Discourse [/alert-primary]
[alert-primary] Stylistics and Discourse [/alert-primary]
[alert-info][btn href="https://www.speedynotes.in/2022/06/study-guides.html" target="_blank" class="bt lg bt-info" btn]Study Guide[/btn][/alert-info]
Stylistics is concerned with the study of style in language. Without specifically referring to language, the term "style" is one that we use so frequently in conversation and writing that it seems unproblematic. It happens so frequently and naturally that we have a tendency to take it for granted without really understanding what we mean when we use it. As a result, we frequently use it to refer to something's shape or design (for instance, "the elegant style of a house") as well as to describe how something is done or presented (for instance, "I don't like his style of management"). Similar phrases include "She writes in a rigorous style" and "She started off in fine style" when describing someone's writing, speaking, or performing style.
When describing the distinctive manner of an artist, a school, or a period, we also discuss specific styles of furniture, painting, and dress. Finally, when we say that someone or something has "style," we are conveying the idea that they are elegant, sophisticated, or behave in a superior way (for instance, "They live in grand style" or "Here one can eat in style").
These commonplace ideas serve as a good springboard for a more technical discussion of the application of style. the language. All of them, in one way or another, refer to a particular style of expression, regardless of the means by which this expression takes physical form. In a similar vein, distinctive linguistic expression can be described as language style. However, just like with other examples of style, we must take into account what makes a phrase unique, the intent behind its creation, and the results it produces. Stylistics, or the study of style, is the analysis of distinctive language expression and the description of its function and outcome.
These commonplace ideas serve as a good springboard for a more technical discussion of the application of style. the language. All of them, in one way or another, refer to a particular style of expression, regardless of the means by which this expression takes physical form. In a similar vein, distinctive linguistic expression can be described as language style. However, just like with other examples of style, we must take into account what makes a phrase unique, the intent behind its creation, and the results it produces. Stylistics, or the study of style, is the analysis of distinctive language expression and the description of its function and outcome.
Discourse is the process by which a text is made active by being connected to a context of use. To put it another way, the reader's (and the hearer's in the case of spoken text) reconstruction of the writer's (or speaker's) intended message, that is, his or her communicative act or discourse, is what is meant by the term "contextualization" of a text. According to this definition, the text is the tangible result of the speaker's or writer's discourse, which is to be understood as the process that gave rise to it. The degree to which a text can be observed depends on its format, for instance, whether it takes the form of written text, a sound recording, or unrecorded speech.
But regardless of the format, a reader (or listener) will look for hints or cues in the text that can help them piece together the author's (or speaker's) argument. The reader (or listener) may, however, infer a different discourse from the text than the one the writer (or speaker) had intended simply because he or she is engaged in a process of reconstruction. In light of this, it is also possible to assert that the interpretation of discourse is largely a negotiation between the writer (speaker) and the reader (hearer) in a contextualised social interaction. So, if a language is found to record a meaningful discourse and is related to an appropriate context of use, we can infer that any language can realise a text.
But regardless of the format, a reader (or listener) will look for hints or cues in the text that can help them piece together the author's (or speaker's) argument. The reader (or listener) may, however, infer a different discourse from the text than the one the writer (or speaker) had intended simply because he or she is engaged in a process of reconstruction. In light of this, it is also possible to assert that the interpretation of discourse is largely a negotiation between the writer (speaker) and the reader (hearer) in a contextualised social interaction. So, if a language is found to record a meaningful discourse and is related to an appropriate context of use, we can infer that any language can realise a text.
In order to extract a discourse from a text, we must investigate two distinct meaning-producing contexts: the extrinsic contextual factors that are thought to influence the text's linguistic meaning and its intrinsic linguistic or formal properties (such as its sounds, typography, vocabulary, grammar, and so on). Two academic disciplines are interested in these two interconnected sites of meaning: While pragmatics is concerned, semantics is the study of formal meanings as they are encoded in the language of texts, i.e., apart from writers (speakers) and readers (hearers) set in a specific context. with the meaning of language in discourse, or when it is used in a suitable setting to accomplish specific goals. While pragmatics is derived from the interaction between semantic meaning and context rather than being an alternative to it.
0 Comments