Pub Date : 2022-01-02DOI: 10.1177/09639470211048159
Raksangob Wijitsopon
The present study adopts a corpus stylistic approach to: (1) examine a relationship between textual patterns of colour words in The Great Gatsby and their symbolic interpretations and (2) investigate the ways those patterns are handled in Thai translations. Distribution and co-occurrence patterns were analysed for colour words that are key in the novel: white, grey, yellow and lavender. The density and frequent patterns of each word are argued to foreground an association between the colour word and particular concepts, pointing to symbolic meaning potentials related to the novel’s themes of socioeconomic inequality and destructive wealth. The textual patterns are compared with what occurs in three Thai translations of the novel. While most of the colour images are directly translated, non-equivalents tend to be applied to figurative uses of the colour terms. This results in some changes in textual patterns of the colour words in the translated texts, which can in turn affect readers’ interpretations of colour symbolism in the novel.
{"title":"Corpus stylistics and colour symbolism in The Great Gatsby and its Thai translations","authors":"Raksangob Wijitsopon","doi":"10.1177/09639470211048159","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09639470211048159","url":null,"abstract":"The present study adopts a corpus stylistic approach to: (1) examine a relationship between textual patterns of colour words in The Great Gatsby and their symbolic interpretations and (2) investigate the ways those patterns are handled in Thai translations. Distribution and co-occurrence patterns were analysed for colour words that are key in the novel: white, grey, yellow and lavender. The density and frequent patterns of each word are argued to foreground an association between the colour word and particular concepts, pointing to symbolic meaning potentials related to the novel’s themes of socioeconomic inequality and destructive wealth. The textual patterns are compared with what occurs in three Thai translations of the novel. While most of the colour images are directly translated, non-equivalents tend to be applied to figurative uses of the colour terms. This results in some changes in textual patterns of the colour words in the translated texts, which can in turn affect readers’ interpretations of colour symbolism in the novel.","PeriodicalId":45849,"journal":{"name":"Language and Literature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2022-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45421617","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-14DOI: 10.1177/09639470211059254
Irene O’Leary
Interaction between text and reader is a prominent concern in stylistics. This paper focusses on interactions among stylistic processes and subconscious microcognitive processes that generate changes to narrative and interpretation during reading. Drawing on process philosophy and recent neuroscientific research, I articulate this dynamism through analysis of a brief narrative moment from each of The.PowerBook by Jeanette Winterson and Oryx and Crake by Margaret Atwood. I argue that high densities of stylistic and microcognitive perturbations lead to frequent narrative and interpretive changes in the two moments. The analyses reinforce portrayals of reading as intensely complex, dynamic and changeable. Complexity, dynamism and mutability also characterise the stylistic changes in the two narrative moments. This paper advocates greater attention to the role of volatile stylistic and cognitive microdynamics in shaping the reading of prose fiction.
{"title":"Literary dynamics in The.PowerBook by Jeanette Winterson and Oryx and Crake by Margaret Atwood","authors":"Irene O’Leary","doi":"10.1177/09639470211059254","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09639470211059254","url":null,"abstract":"Interaction between text and reader is a prominent concern in stylistics. This paper focusses on interactions among stylistic processes and subconscious microcognitive processes that generate changes to narrative and interpretation during reading. Drawing on process philosophy and recent neuroscientific research, I articulate this dynamism through analysis of a brief narrative moment from each of The.PowerBook by Jeanette Winterson and Oryx and Crake by Margaret Atwood. I argue that high densities of stylistic and microcognitive perturbations lead to frequent narrative and interpretive changes in the two moments. The analyses reinforce portrayals of reading as intensely complex, dynamic and changeable. Complexity, dynamism and mutability also characterise the stylistic changes in the two narrative moments. This paper advocates greater attention to the role of volatile stylistic and cognitive microdynamics in shaping the reading of prose fiction.","PeriodicalId":45849,"journal":{"name":"Language and Literature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-12-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45355707","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-12-07DOI: 10.1177/09639470211054647
Orsolya Papp-Zipernovszky, Anne Mangen, A. Jacobs, J. Lüdtke
The present study combines literary theory and cognitive psychology to empirically explore some cognitive and emotional facets of poetry reading, exemplified by the reading of three Shakespeare sonnets. Specifically, predictions generated combining quantitative textual analysis according to the Neurocognitive Poetics model with qualitative textual analysis based on the Foregrounding assessment Matrix of sonnets no. 27, 60 and 66 are empirically tested by analyzing 45 subjects’ ratings of the three sonnets. Reflecting the differences in foregrounding potential of the three sonnets found in the textual analysis, we expected to find different reader responses, accordingly. Our dependent variables are well-established categories of emotional evaluation (e.g. valence and arousal) and cognitive, affective and aesthetic aspects of readers’ responses (e.g. liking and understanding) as well as less common ones (e.g. wonder, delight and mental images). The statistical analyses suggest that the type of foregrounding is more important than the number of foregrounded elements. This finding motivated further qualitative exploration of reader responses to open questions regarding mental images and perceived feelings. Comparing the free recall data about the feelings perceived in the sonnets with the ratings data about Valence and Arousal indicated that only the former one reflects a clear distinction between all three sonnets, whereas the readers’ overall evaluations did not sustain this variety of feelings. Multi-method, interdisciplinary research of this kind contributes to improving our understanding of the potentially unique mechanisms involved in poetry reception, and to forming more precise hypotheses for future experimental studies using, for example, eye tracking.
{"title":"Shakespeare sonnet reading: An empirical study of emotional responses","authors":"Orsolya Papp-Zipernovszky, Anne Mangen, A. Jacobs, J. Lüdtke","doi":"10.1177/09639470211054647","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09639470211054647","url":null,"abstract":"The present study combines literary theory and cognitive psychology to empirically explore some cognitive and emotional facets of poetry reading, exemplified by the reading of three Shakespeare sonnets. Specifically, predictions generated combining quantitative textual analysis according to the Neurocognitive Poetics model with qualitative textual analysis based on the Foregrounding assessment Matrix of sonnets no. 27, 60 and 66 are empirically tested by analyzing 45 subjects’ ratings of the three sonnets. Reflecting the differences in foregrounding potential of the three sonnets found in the textual analysis, we expected to find different reader responses, accordingly. Our dependent variables are well-established categories of emotional evaluation (e.g. valence and arousal) and cognitive, affective and aesthetic aspects of readers’ responses (e.g. liking and understanding) as well as less common ones (e.g. wonder, delight and mental images). The statistical analyses suggest that the type of foregrounding is more important than the number of foregrounded elements. This finding motivated further qualitative exploration of reader responses to open questions regarding mental images and perceived feelings. Comparing the free recall data about the feelings perceived in the sonnets with the ratings data about Valence and Arousal indicated that only the former one reflects a clear distinction between all three sonnets, whereas the readers’ overall evaluations did not sustain this variety of feelings. Multi-method, interdisciplinary research of this kind contributes to improving our understanding of the potentially unique mechanisms involved in poetry reception, and to forming more precise hypotheses for future experimental studies using, for example, eye tracking.","PeriodicalId":45849,"journal":{"name":"Language and Literature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-12-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43212374","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-10-24DOI: 10.1177/09639470211056687
Simon Statham
When I signed off the previous ‘Year’s work’ article I naively looked forward to a year ahead of restored travel to international conferences and other trappings of the ‘old normal’. Instead it has been another year of Zooming here and Teaming there and e-books and e-learning. All of this has brought such disruption and steep learning curves that, even amongst the few positives which academics may have found in our ongoing lockdown lives, we could be forgiven for not producing any new work at all. Not so stylisticians. To Simpson’s (2014: 4) three ‘Rs’, we can now add ‘resilience’, for stylisticians seem to have responded to the crisis of the pandemic by continuing to produce work of incredible breadth and depth. To paraphrase the epigraph from Bram Stoker, it is really wonderful how much resilience there is in stylistics. The same resilience cannot be necessarily attributed to me, so I wish to bring forward the disclaimer that often comes at the end of the ‘Year’s work’ that it is not possible to acknowledge all of the work produced in stylistics in a single year in a single article. Trying to be as comprehensive as possible has been complicated by the conditions of lockdown, for example where ‘remote access’ has not been granted or where publishers refuse steadfastly to stray from the new e-book obsession. Nonetheless the article aims to be a fairly thorough snapshot, if there is such a thing, into the resilient and unfaltering stylistics of 2020. As always, articles published in Language and Literature are not included in the references section to protect the impact factor of the journal but they are given with relevant volume and issue numbers so that readers can locate them. The sections into which the article is organised are not necessarily intended to indicate definitive
{"title":"The year’s work in stylistics 2020","authors":"Simon Statham","doi":"10.1177/09639470211056687","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09639470211056687","url":null,"abstract":"When I signed off the previous ‘Year’s work’ article I naively looked forward to a year ahead of restored travel to international conferences and other trappings of the ‘old normal’. Instead it has been another year of Zooming here and Teaming there and e-books and e-learning. All of this has brought such disruption and steep learning curves that, even amongst the few positives which academics may have found in our ongoing lockdown lives, we could be forgiven for not producing any new work at all. Not so stylisticians. To Simpson’s (2014: 4) three ‘Rs’, we can now add ‘resilience’, for stylisticians seem to have responded to the crisis of the pandemic by continuing to produce work of incredible breadth and depth. To paraphrase the epigraph from Bram Stoker, it is really wonderful how much resilience there is in stylistics. The same resilience cannot be necessarily attributed to me, so I wish to bring forward the disclaimer that often comes at the end of the ‘Year’s work’ that it is not possible to acknowledge all of the work produced in stylistics in a single year in a single article. Trying to be as comprehensive as possible has been complicated by the conditions of lockdown, for example where ‘remote access’ has not been granted or where publishers refuse steadfastly to stray from the new e-book obsession. Nonetheless the article aims to be a fairly thorough snapshot, if there is such a thing, into the resilient and unfaltering stylistics of 2020. As always, articles published in Language and Literature are not included in the references section to protect the impact factor of the journal but they are given with relevant volume and issue numbers so that readers can locate them. The sections into which the article is organised are not necessarily intended to indicate definitive","PeriodicalId":45849,"journal":{"name":"Language and Literature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48068189","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-29DOI: 10.1177/09639470211047751
Andreas H. Jucker
This paper explores the pervasiveness of features of orality in the language of performed fiction. Features of orality are typical of spontaneous spoken conversations where they are the result of the ongoing planning process and the interaction between the interlocutors, but they also occur in the context of performed fiction (movies and plays) and in narrative fiction (e.g. novels). In these contexts, they are not the result of the spontaneous planning process but are generally produced to imitate such processes. In this paper, I explore a small range of such features (contractions, interjections, discourse markers, response forms and hesitators) in four corpora of performed fiction that have recently become available (Corpus of American Soap Operas, TV Corpus, Movies Corpus and Sydney Corpus of Television Dialogue) and compare their frequency patterns with spontaneous face-to-face conversations in the Santa Barbara Corpus of Spoken American English and with narrative fiction and academic writing in the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). The results confirm that the selected features of orality are used regularly in performed fiction but less frequently than in spontaneous face-to-face interactions while they are rare in narrative fiction and almost entirely absent in academic writing. The results also show that the status of the transcriptions contained in these corpora needs to be assessed very carefully if they are to be used for a study of pragmatic features.
{"title":"Features of orality in the language of fiction: A corpus-based investigation","authors":"Andreas H. Jucker","doi":"10.1177/09639470211047751","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09639470211047751","url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores the pervasiveness of features of orality in the language of performed fiction. Features of orality are typical of spontaneous spoken conversations where they are the result of the ongoing planning process and the interaction between the interlocutors, but they also occur in the context of performed fiction (movies and plays) and in narrative fiction (e.g. novels). In these contexts, they are not the result of the spontaneous planning process but are generally produced to imitate such processes. In this paper, I explore a small range of such features (contractions, interjections, discourse markers, response forms and hesitators) in four corpora of performed fiction that have recently become available (Corpus of American Soap Operas, TV Corpus, Movies Corpus and Sydney Corpus of Television Dialogue) and compare their frequency patterns with spontaneous face-to-face conversations in the Santa Barbara Corpus of Spoken American English and with narrative fiction and academic writing in the Corpus of Contemporary American English (COCA). The results confirm that the selected features of orality are used regularly in performed fiction but less frequently than in spontaneous face-to-face interactions while they are rare in narrative fiction and almost entirely absent in academic writing. The results also show that the status of the transcriptions contained in these corpora needs to be assessed very carefully if they are to be used for a study of pragmatic features.","PeriodicalId":45849,"journal":{"name":"Language and Literature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45309623","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-29DOI: 10.1177/09639470211047732
J. Gavins, S. Whiteley, Duygu Çandarlı
This article reports on some of the results of a project undertaken by researchers at the University of Sheffield with The National Trust in the UK, which seeks to examine the discourse found in guestbooks located in the Trust’s holiday rental cottages. Our key interests lie in the ways in which holidaymakers perform particular identities through the stylistic choices they make when writing entries in guestbooks, the role linguistic creativity plays in these performances, and the extent to which cognitive-linguistic analysis can help us understand guestbooks as socially and conceptually complex sites of linguistic interaction. Between 2014 and 2018, we collected over 800,000 words of data from 13 holiday cottages in two popular holiday regions in the UK: the Roseland Peninsula in South East Cornwall and the Port Quin area of Northern Cornwall. Our dataset was analysed and tagged using NVivo qualitative coding software, which enables the identification of both linguistic and non-linguistic features of the discourse and makes these items searchable. In the present discussion, we use Text World Theory to explore both the situational context of this discourse, or the ‘discourse-world’, and the conceptual structures, or ‘text-worlds’, which result from linguistic interaction in the minds of participants. We suggest that the unified examination of these two interacting levels of discourse enables a holistic investigation of the pragmatic and conceptual environment which surrounds the production and reception of the guestbook discourse; the linguistic and stylistic features of the texts themselves; and the mental representations that arise from them. In particular, we present a case-study analysis of the guestbooks of Caragloose, a three-bedroomed former farmhouse in South East Cornwall, which our study found to contain levels of linguistic creativity which were exceptional in our dataset. We outline the key stylistic features of this discourse and show how one collective linguistic endeavour in particular in Caragloose fosters an exceptionally experimental style across multiple entries. We reveal how the resulting discourse, although taking place between strangers separated in both time and space, exhibits a density of creativity more commonly associated with collaborative discourse produced between intimates in a face-to-face situation.
{"title":"Linguistic co-creativity and the performance of identity in the discourse of National Trust holiday cottage guestbooks","authors":"J. Gavins, S. Whiteley, Duygu Çandarlı","doi":"10.1177/09639470211047732","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09639470211047732","url":null,"abstract":"This article reports on some of the results of a project undertaken by researchers at the University of Sheffield with The National Trust in the UK, which seeks to examine the discourse found in guestbooks located in the Trust’s holiday rental cottages. Our key interests lie in the ways in which holidaymakers perform particular identities through the stylistic choices they make when writing entries in guestbooks, the role linguistic creativity plays in these performances, and the extent to which cognitive-linguistic analysis can help us understand guestbooks as socially and conceptually complex sites of linguistic interaction. Between 2014 and 2018, we collected over 800,000 words of data from 13 holiday cottages in two popular holiday regions in the UK: the Roseland Peninsula in South East Cornwall and the Port Quin area of Northern Cornwall. Our dataset was analysed and tagged using NVivo qualitative coding software, which enables the identification of both linguistic and non-linguistic features of the discourse and makes these items searchable. In the present discussion, we use Text World Theory to explore both the situational context of this discourse, or the ‘discourse-world’, and the conceptual structures, or ‘text-worlds’, which result from linguistic interaction in the minds of participants. We suggest that the unified examination of these two interacting levels of discourse enables a holistic investigation of the pragmatic and conceptual environment which surrounds the production and reception of the guestbook discourse; the linguistic and stylistic features of the texts themselves; and the mental representations that arise from them. In particular, we present a case-study analysis of the guestbooks of Caragloose, a three-bedroomed former farmhouse in South East Cornwall, which our study found to contain levels of linguistic creativity which were exceptional in our dataset. We outline the key stylistic features of this discourse and show how one collective linguistic endeavour in particular in Caragloose fosters an exceptionally experimental style across multiple entries. We reveal how the resulting discourse, although taking place between strangers separated in both time and space, exhibits a density of creativity more commonly associated with collaborative discourse produced between intimates in a face-to-face situation.","PeriodicalId":45849,"journal":{"name":"Language and Literature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43672087","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-29DOI: 10.1177/09639470211047817
Edward De Vooght, Guylian Nemegeer
This article confronts the theoretical tenets of reader-oriented short story collection theory and its implications for a literary analysis of Benni’s Il bar sotto il mare (1987) with the results of an empirical study of 12 readers. Through free recall tasks and open questions, we collected their recall of stories, specific passages, recurring topics and general interpretation to assess the processes of reticulation (i.e. searching for recurring elements in stories) and modification (i.e. modifying initial hypotheses based on the identification of new elements) advanced by Audet (2014). This confrontation revealed noticeably disagreeing results. Our findings suggest that flesh-and-blood readers adopt a more straightforward and intuitive approach when reading and interpreting collections as they are subject to a strong primacy effect, privilege personal appreciation of specific stories and passages, and rely on a disinclination to alter initial interpretative hypotheses. The findings pave the way for further investigation into the readers of SSCs.
本文通过对12位读者的实证研究，直面读者导向短篇小说集理论的理论原则及其对本尼的《Il bar sotto Il mare》（1987）文学分析的启示。通过自由回忆任务和开放式问题，我们收集了他们对故事的回忆、特定段落、重复出现的主题和一般解释，以评估Audet（2014）提出的网状化（即在故事中寻找重复出现的元素）和修改（即在识别新元素的基础上修改初始假设）的过程。这场对峙显示出明显的分歧结果。我们的研究结果表明，有血有肉的读者在阅读和解释文集时采取了更直接、更直观的方法，因为他们受到强烈的首要效应的影响，对特定故事和段落的个人欣赏享有特权，并且不愿意改变最初的解释假设。这些发现为进一步调查SSC的读者铺平了道路。
{"title":"Reading and analysing short story collections: An empirical study of readers' interpretation process of Benni's Il bar sotto il mare","authors":"Edward De Vooght, Guylian Nemegeer","doi":"10.1177/09639470211047817","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09639470211047817","url":null,"abstract":"This article confronts the theoretical tenets of reader-oriented short story collection theory and its implications for a literary analysis of Benni’s Il bar sotto il mare (1987) with the results of an empirical study of 12 readers. Through free recall tasks and open questions, we collected their recall of stories, specific passages, recurring topics and general interpretation to assess the processes of reticulation (i.e. searching for recurring elements in stories) and modification (i.e. modifying initial hypotheses based on the identification of new elements) advanced by Audet (2014). This confrontation revealed noticeably disagreeing results. Our findings suggest that flesh-and-blood readers adopt a more straightforward and intuitive approach when reading and interpreting collections as they are subject to a strong primacy effect, privilege personal appreciation of specific stories and passages, and rely on a disinclination to alter initial interpretative hypotheses. The findings pave the way for further investigation into the readers of SSCs.","PeriodicalId":45849,"journal":{"name":"Language and Literature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49224587","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-01DOI: 10.1177/09639470211040737
Jun-xia Feng
{"title":"Book Review: Cognitive Poetics: An Introduction","authors":"Jun-xia Feng","doi":"10.1177/09639470211040737","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09639470211040737","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":45849,"journal":{"name":"Language and Literature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47084986","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-01DOI: 10.1177/09639470211040738
Víctor Bermúdez
Fairclough N (1996) Border crossings: Discourse and social change in contemporary societies. In: Change and Language (BAAL 10): Multilingual Matters. Klemperer V (2000) The Language of the Third Reich. London: Athlone Press. Wales K (2008) Regional variation in English in the new millennium: looking to the future. In: Locher MA and Straessler J (eds) Standards and Norms in the English Language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 47-68. Walters S (2020) The Borisaurus. London: Biteback.
费尔克劳N(1996)，边境过境:当代社会的话语与社会变迁。见:变化与语言(BAAL 10):多语言问题。Klemperer V(2000)第三帝国的语言。伦敦:阿斯隆出版社。威尔士K(2008)新千年英语的地区差异:展望未来。见:Locher MA和Straessler J(编)英语语言的标准和规范。柏林:Mouton de Gruyter，第47-68页。沃尔特斯S(2020)鲍里斯龙。伦敦:Biteback。
{"title":"Book review: The poem as icon: A study in aesthetic cognition","authors":"Víctor Bermúdez","doi":"10.1177/09639470211040738","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09639470211040738","url":null,"abstract":"Fairclough N (1996) Border crossings: Discourse and social change in contemporary societies. In: Change and Language (BAAL 10): Multilingual Matters. Klemperer V (2000) The Language of the Third Reich. London: Athlone Press. Wales K (2008) Regional variation in English in the new millennium: looking to the future. In: Locher MA and Straessler J (eds) Standards and Norms in the English Language. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, pp. 47-68. Walters S (2020) The Borisaurus. London: Biteback.","PeriodicalId":45849,"journal":{"name":"Language and Literature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45337889","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-08-01DOI: 10.1177/09639470211040722
K. Wales
beat poets, Dante and Petrarch, and the Confessions of St Augustine. All this of course establishes Dylan as a major artist. In contrast to these three dominant approaches to Dylan’s work, then, Hampton’s approach consists in exploring how ‘songs are made and how specific literary and musical techniques work to generate particular manifestations of style in song’ (p. 13). This emphasis on ‘style’ is of course from a stylistic viewpoint extremely promising. However, Hampton has a literary-critical rather than a stylistic understanding of ‘style’, seeing it in terms of how ‘artists manipulate different levels or historically defined registers of representation’ (p. 13), and of ‘the conventions that dominate a particular moment’ (p. 16). Despite his emphasis on ‘close analysis’ (p. 9), however, Hampton has disappointingly little to say about how Dylan’s songs really work–as complex linguistic phenomena. Hampton’s focus is primarily on how Dylan relates to other artists, and the trajectory of his analyses is always towards the thematic or meaningful level of the songs. As a consequence, he does not deal in any great depth with how Dylan creates meaningful effects by manipulating the sonic and syntactic levels of language. One important feature of Dylan’s work to which Hampton pays little or no attention, for example, is the way that Dylan manipulates his singing voice in order to create sonic ambiguity: it is very often simply impossible to be sure of what he is singing. For instance, the song ‘Tangled Up in Blue’ (the song to which Hampton devotes the most attention) contains a number of sonically ambiguous lines: does Dylan sing, ‘They never did like mama’s homemade dress, papa’s banquet wasn’t big enough’ (as I always thought) or ‘They never did like mama’s home address, papa’s bank book wasn’t big enough’ (as the official lyrics attest)? My point is that an approach rooted in stylistics rather than the close-analysis tradition of literary criticism would be able to say much more about how Dylan’s songs really work. Hampton’s book, then, is a timely reminder of why Dylan’s work matters, and his approach manages to avoid the usual pitfalls of Dylan criticism. It made me appreciate once more the depth and complexity of Dylan’s oeuvre (which has been the soundtrack to most of my life), and provided me with new insights into many of the songs. It certainly differs from, and is better than, most other work on Dylan. But there is still a book on Dylan to be written from the more fruitful perspective of stylistics.
击败诗人，但丁和彼特拉克，以及圣奥古斯丁的忏悔录。所有这些当然奠定了迪伦作为一个主要艺术家的地位。与迪伦作品的这三种主要方法相反，汉普顿的方法在于探索“歌曲是如何制作的，以及特定的文学和音乐技巧如何在歌曲中产生特定的风格表现”（第13页）。当然，从文体的角度来看，这种对“风格”的强调是非常有希望的。然而，汉普顿对“风格”有着文学批评而非文体理解，从“艺术家如何操纵不同层次或历史定义的表现形式”（第13页）和“支配特定时刻的惯例”（第16页）的角度来看。然而，尽管汉普顿强调“密切分析”（第9页），但令人失望的是，他对迪伦的歌曲作为复杂的语言现象是如何真正发挥作用的几乎没有什么可说的。汉普顿的重点主要是迪伦与其他艺术家的关系，他的分析轨迹总是指向歌曲的主题或有意义的层面。因此，他没有深入探讨迪伦如何通过操纵语言的声音和句法水平来创造有意义的效果。例如，汉普顿很少或根本不注意迪伦作品的一个重要特征是，迪伦操纵歌声以制造声音模糊的方式：通常根本不可能确定他在唱什么。例如，歌曲“Tangled Up in Blue”（汉普顿最关注的歌曲）包含了许多声音模糊的台词：迪伦唱的是“他们从来都不喜欢妈妈自制的衣服，爸爸的宴会不够大”（正如我一直认为的那样）还是“他们从来就不喜欢妈妈的家庭地址，“爸爸的存折不够大”（官方歌词证明了这一点）？我的观点是，一种植根于文体学的方法，而不是文学批评的密切分析传统，将能够更多地说明迪伦的歌曲是如何真正发挥作用的。因此，汉普顿的书及时提醒人们，为什么迪伦的作品很重要，他的方法成功地避免了迪伦批评中常见的陷阱。它让我再次欣赏迪伦作品的深度和复杂性（这是我一生中大部分时间的原声音乐），并为我对许多歌曲提供了新的见解。它当然不同于，也比大多数其他关于迪伦的作品更好。但从文体学的角度来看，还有一本关于迪伦的书要写。
{"title":"Book Review: Political English: Language and the Decay of Politics","authors":"K. Wales","doi":"10.1177/09639470211040722","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09639470211040722","url":null,"abstract":"beat poets, Dante and Petrarch, and the Confessions of St Augustine. All this of course establishes Dylan as a major artist. In contrast to these three dominant approaches to Dylan’s work, then, Hampton’s approach consists in exploring how ‘songs are made and how specific literary and musical techniques work to generate particular manifestations of style in song’ (p. 13). This emphasis on ‘style’ is of course from a stylistic viewpoint extremely promising. However, Hampton has a literary-critical rather than a stylistic understanding of ‘style’, seeing it in terms of how ‘artists manipulate different levels or historically defined registers of representation’ (p. 13), and of ‘the conventions that dominate a particular moment’ (p. 16). Despite his emphasis on ‘close analysis’ (p. 9), however, Hampton has disappointingly little to say about how Dylan’s songs really work–as complex linguistic phenomena. Hampton’s focus is primarily on how Dylan relates to other artists, and the trajectory of his analyses is always towards the thematic or meaningful level of the songs. As a consequence, he does not deal in any great depth with how Dylan creates meaningful effects by manipulating the sonic and syntactic levels of language. One important feature of Dylan’s work to which Hampton pays little or no attention, for example, is the way that Dylan manipulates his singing voice in order to create sonic ambiguity: it is very often simply impossible to be sure of what he is singing. For instance, the song ‘Tangled Up in Blue’ (the song to which Hampton devotes the most attention) contains a number of sonically ambiguous lines: does Dylan sing, ‘They never did like mama’s homemade dress, papa’s banquet wasn’t big enough’ (as I always thought) or ‘They never did like mama’s home address, papa’s bank book wasn’t big enough’ (as the official lyrics attest)? My point is that an approach rooted in stylistics rather than the close-analysis tradition of literary criticism would be able to say much more about how Dylan’s songs really work. Hampton’s book, then, is a timely reminder of why Dylan’s work matters, and his approach manages to avoid the usual pitfalls of Dylan criticism. It made me appreciate once more the depth and complexity of Dylan’s oeuvre (which has been the soundtrack to most of my life), and provided me with new insights into many of the songs. It certainly differs from, and is better than, most other work on Dylan. But there is still a book on Dylan to be written from the more fruitful perspective of stylistics.","PeriodicalId":45849,"journal":{"name":"Language and Literature","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.7,"publicationDate":"2021-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48784276","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：