《乡土乡土》:莎士比亚,他的同代人,以及否定的句法

IF 0.6 3区 文学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Language and Literature Pub Date : 2023-05-25 DOI:10.1177/09639470231160579
Richard Ingham, Michael Ingham
{"title":"《乡土乡土》:莎士比亚,他的同代人,以及否定的句法","authors":"Richard Ingham, Michael Ingham","doi":"10.1177/09639470231160579","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper builds on findings on variation in Elizabethan grammar, analysing the syntax of negation in a large number of Shakespearean stage dramas and those of his contemporaries. It shows that Shakespeare differed substantially from them grammatically and stylistically. His contemporaries most often adhered to the emerging standard pattern of avoiding Subject-Verb syntax and multiple negation, whereas Shakespeare made much greater use of it, especially in coordinate contexts. In other contexts, use of multiple negation by other authors was usually for characterological purposes, whereas in Shakespeare it is employed as a stylistic resource regardless of the character’s social standing. These findings are interpreted against the background of sociolinguistic research on diachronic English syntax, showing that higher-status individuals led the change away from multiple negation. The differing outcomes are related to Shakespeare’s provincial background and non-participation in a university milieu, distinguishing him from the ‘golden triangle’ background of his contemporary dramatists.","PeriodicalId":45849,"journal":{"name":"Language and Literature","volume":"32 1","pages":"355 - 375"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘Native woodnotes wild’: Shakespeare, his contemporaries, and the syntax of negation\",\"authors\":\"Richard Ingham, Michael Ingham\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/09639470231160579\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper builds on findings on variation in Elizabethan grammar, analysing the syntax of negation in a large number of Shakespearean stage dramas and those of his contemporaries. It shows that Shakespeare differed substantially from them grammatically and stylistically. His contemporaries most often adhered to the emerging standard pattern of avoiding Subject-Verb syntax and multiple negation, whereas Shakespeare made much greater use of it, especially in coordinate contexts. In other contexts, use of multiple negation by other authors was usually for characterological purposes, whereas in Shakespeare it is employed as a stylistic resource regardless of the character’s social standing. These findings are interpreted against the background of sociolinguistic research on diachronic English syntax, showing that higher-status individuals led the change away from multiple negation. The differing outcomes are related to Shakespeare’s provincial background and non-participation in a university milieu, distinguishing him from the ‘golden triangle’ background of his contemporary dramatists.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45849,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Language and Literature\",\"volume\":\"32 1\",\"pages\":\"355 - 375\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Language and Literature\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/09639470231160579\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language and Literature","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/09639470231160579","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文以伊丽莎白语法变异的研究成果为基础,分析了大量莎士比亚舞台剧和同时代莎士比亚舞台剧的否定语法。这表明莎士比亚在语法和文体上与他们有很大的不同。与他同时代的人大多坚持新兴的标准模式,即避免主语动词语法和多重否定,而莎士比亚则更多地使用了这一模式,尤其是在协调上下文中。在其他情况下,其他作者使用多重否定通常是出于性格学的目的,而在莎士比亚中,无论角色的社会地位如何,它都被用作一种文体资源。这些发现是在社会语言学对历时英语句法研究的背景下解释的,表明地位更高的个体引导了对多重否定的转变。不同的结果与莎士比亚的乡土背景和不参与大学环境有关,这将他与当代剧作家的“金三角”背景区分开来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
‘Native woodnotes wild’: Shakespeare, his contemporaries, and the syntax of negation
This paper builds on findings on variation in Elizabethan grammar, analysing the syntax of negation in a large number of Shakespearean stage dramas and those of his contemporaries. It shows that Shakespeare differed substantially from them grammatically and stylistically. His contemporaries most often adhered to the emerging standard pattern of avoiding Subject-Verb syntax and multiple negation, whereas Shakespeare made much greater use of it, especially in coordinate contexts. In other contexts, use of multiple negation by other authors was usually for characterological purposes, whereas in Shakespeare it is employed as a stylistic resource regardless of the character’s social standing. These findings are interpreted against the background of sociolinguistic research on diachronic English syntax, showing that higher-status individuals led the change away from multiple negation. The differing outcomes are related to Shakespeare’s provincial background and non-participation in a university milieu, distinguishing him from the ‘golden triangle’ background of his contemporary dramatists.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
14.30%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Language and Literature is an invaluable international peer-reviewed journal that covers the latest research in stylistics, defined as the study of style in literary and non-literary language. We publish theoretical, empirical and experimental research that aims to make a contribution to our understanding of style and its effects on readers. Topics covered by the journal include (but are not limited to) the following: the stylistic analysis of literary and non-literary texts, cognitive approaches to text comprehension, corpus and computational stylistics, the stylistic investigation of multimodal texts, pedagogical stylistics, the reading process, software development for stylistics, and real-world applications for stylistic analysis. We welcome articles that investigate the relationship between stylistics and other areas of linguistics, such as text linguistics, sociolinguistics and translation studies. We also encourage interdisciplinary submissions that explore the connections between stylistics and such cognate subjects and disciplines as psychology, literary studies, narratology, computer science and neuroscience. Language and Literature is essential reading for academics, teachers and students working in stylistics and related areas of language and literary studies.
期刊最新文献
Language, nature, and the framing of death: An ecostylistic analysis of Laura Wade’s Colder Than Here Book review: Fiction and pragmatics Gender characterization in Lady Windermere’s Fan and its Chinese translations: A corpus stylistic approach Weaving narrative threads with social psychological processes: Narrative modulations in online consumer reviews of a medical memoir Sensuous modernity: The linguistic construction of femininity in the fashion content of early 1920s Vogue
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1