“text linguistics” · fairly strictly to models of textuality in order to conform to reader...

“Text Linguistics”


Nowadays, textuality is assumed to be eitherLiterary or Non-literary

In non-literary texts rhetorical structure is considered to be a non-creative application of textual rules, an obligation imposed by the text

and its type.


Literature as a field of study is (almost) the exclusive domain of literary critics.

Non-literary textuality is left to the linguist, and many “pure” linguists confine themselves to non-literary texts, as if the two types were governed

by mutually exclusive linguistic principles.


Literary texts are considered not worthy of study by the linguist (as a scientist),

yet also,Literary texts are considered too aesthetically complicated, too artistically idiosyncratic, to be

studied by the linguist (as a scientist).


This situation is highly reflective of the modernist attitude toward the arts.

The artist, by definition, is one who imposes a personal vision on the world by breaking with

traditional kinds of composition.

“Text Linguistics”The older, formal rules of literary composition

were very different in medieval and Renaissance times – not to mention for epic Greek poetry or

skaldic Norse poetry.

Nevertheless, we recognize both Shakespeare and Beckett as belonging to the same genre despite the great differences in their work.

Therefore literary genres must also have continuity of textual forms that can permit the

identification of typological forms.


Typologies are in constant evolution.

General texts (i.e. non-literary) are also typologically changing over time.

Such changes are less perceptible in large part because they have not been studied previously.


An examination of business correspondance would show such changes over time.

So also would diplomatic correspondence:in the early part of the 20th century, the Kaiser

and the Tsar addressed themselves as My Dear Nicky and My Dear Willy (they were cousins).

Imagine Putin and Merkel addressing one another as Vladie and Angie!


Fissore opines that literary texts can be described as having a “sociolinguistic zero-

function.” Poets no longer praise the monarch.

Such an idea seems questionable.

However, the division of texts into expressive and communicative categories is a fact of

academic linguistic study.

“Text Linguistics”Communicative texts are based on negotiation:

tailored for certain addresseeswritten for a certain purposefollowing a textual tradition

meeting the addressee's expectationsresponding to contingent requirements

They are shaped according to textual conventions whose success has been

repeatedly put to the test.


Literary texts (since modernist and post-modernist innovations, at least) do not negotiate.

They seek to break from textual conventions in order to subvert them. (Supposedly)

Gertrude Stein, e e cummings, William S. Burroughs, Leslie Marmon Silko...


Popular literature (i.e. Best-sellers) is classed as communicative primarily because it conforms fairly strictly to models of textuality in order to

conform to reader expectations,

rather than to “challenge” the reader or “subvert” convention as high literature is seen as doing.

Steven King (Under The Dome) vs.David Foster Wallace (Infinite Jest).


In any case, non-literary, communicative, general texts are

far more common and will be encountered by all language users in all modern societies

far more frequently.

Most language users will also produce a great many of them as well.


“A science of texts demands it own terms and notions because of the nature of its object. Probablistic models are more adequate and realistic than deterministic ones. Dynamic

accounts of structure-building operations will be more productive than static description of the

structures themselves. We should work to discover regularities, strategies, motivations,

preferences, and defaults rather than rules and laws.

“Text Linguistics”Dominances can offer more realistic

classifications than can strict categories. Acceptability and appropriateness are more

crucial standards for texts than grammaticality and well-formedness. Human reasoning

processes are more essential to using and conveying knowledge in texts than logical proofs.

It is the task of science to systematize the fuzziness of its objects of inquiry, not to ignore it

or argue it away.” (De Beaugrande, Dressler, 1981)

“Text Linguistics”The functional dichotomy of Jakobson's model (referential/emotive or informative/expressive)

corresponds - more or less - with Halliday's (ideational/interpersonal) and

Lyons's (descriptive/social-expressive).

Brown and Yule (1983) offer their own dichotomy

Transactional vs. Interactional


Transactional

language as a tool for transmitting information

information meaning facts and figures or intellectual ideas and notions

general texts (and some literary ones)have been considered transactional


Interactional

language as a means of “establishing and maintaining social relationships”

(Brown and Yule 1983)

this essentially phatic use is a more recent concern of linguists, sociologists, and

sociolinguists


Brown and Yule do not include literature in their list of interactional genres, but one might

consider whether high literary forms - drama, poetry, the novel - are not in fact essentially a

social phenomenon.

Whatever the case may be, high literature will be excluded from our typology

of transactional forms.

“Text Linguistics”Communicative texts demonstrate

seven standards of textuality

1. Cohesion2. Coherence

3. Intentionality4. Acceptability5. Informativity6. Situationality7. Intertextuality

(De Beaugrande and Dressler, 1981)


‘cohesion’ refers to the surface text

grammatical and lexical dependencies Reference

SubstitutionEllipsis

ConjunctionLexical Cohesion

“Text Linguistics” ‘coherence’ refers to the real (or textual) world

the configuration of concepts and relations which underlie the surface text

for example...QuantityQuality

RelationManner


‘intentionality’ refers to the text writer’s attitude

the set of occurrences should constitute a text instrumental in fullfilling the producer’s intentions,

e.g. to distribute knowledge or to attain a goal specified in a plan


‘acceptability’ refers to the reader’s attitude to the text

the set of occurrences should have some use or relevance for the receiver, e.g. to acquire

knowledge or provide co-operation in a plan


‘informativity’ refers to the message of the text

to what extent is it (un)expected, (un)known, etc.


‘situationality’ refers to the relationship between the message and the context

those factors that make a text relevant to a certain situation in which it occurs


“intertextuality’ refers to other texts

the utilization of the text may be dependent upon knowledge of one or more previously

encountered texts


As such, it cannot be restricted to the description of linguistic forms independent of the purposes or functions which those forms are designed to serve in human affairs. The analysis of discourse is, necessarily, the analysis of language in use. While some linguists may concentrate on determining the formal properties of a language, the discourse analyst is committed to investigation of what the language is used for.

Out of Order! Not a Text!

“Text Linguistics”(1) As such, it cannot be restricted to the

description of linguistic forms independent of the purposes or functions which those forms are

designed to serve in human affairs.

(2) The analysis of discourse is, necessarily, the analysis of language in use.

(3) While some linguists may concentrate on determining the formal properties of a language,

the discourse analyst is committed to investigation of what the language is used for.

Out of Order! Not a Text!


(1) As such, it cannot be restricted to the description of linguistic forms independent of the

purposes or functions which those forms are designed to serve in human affairs.

“As such” being anaphoric, this sentence cannot come first.




While contrasts with the second clause of the sentence, so “3” could theoretically come first...





A detail is unlikely to come before a generality...

“Text Linguistics”(3) While some linguists may concentrate on

determining the formal properties of a language, the discourse analyst is committed to

investigation of what the language is used for.


“Discourse analyst” seems a more specific restriction of the general “analysis of discourse.”

Another detail before a generality...



Effective introductory sentences in scientific writing tend toward brevity, anyway...

“1” cannot be first“2” should precede “3”




(1) As such, it cannot be restricted to the description of linguistic forms independent of the

purposes or functions which those forms are designed to serve in human affairs.


“1” cannot be first“2” should precede “3”

“3” should not precede “1”

therefore...

213


The analysis of discourse is, necessarily, the analysis of language in use. As such, it cannot be restricted to the description of linguistic forms independent of the purposes or functions which those forms are designed to serve in human affairs. While some linguists may concentrate on determining the formal properties of a language, the discourse analyst is committed to investigation of what the language is used for.

In Order! Now, a Text!


For a long time, only literary texts were thought worthy of study, and only the literary genres were

classified by textual typology.

Textuality was thought to rest on aesthetic qualities. Rhetorical elements were properties of literary texts, and any text that showed rhetorical

principles was thought of as a literary text.

“text linguistics” · fairly strictly to models of textuality in order to conform to reader...

Documents