ITTOL - Lecture 9 - Linguistics and Literature
The lecture begins with a review of synchrony and diachrony and their importance to semiotics and structuralism as well as their relation to the Russian formalists. The idea of functions and their relationships first appeared in Formalism which became the synchrony and diachrony of Structuralism and then, from semiotics, added "the idea of negative knowledge". Levi-Strauss' analysis of the Oedipus myth utilizes the idea of negative knowledge by stating there is no one positive version of a myth from which all other versions have been copied.
The key difference between Formalism and Structuralism is the way in which a text is deconstructed. Formalism takes a text apart to see how it works; Structuralism breaks a text into is constituent parts for the purpose of generating material which may then be used to reconstruct a virtual copy of the original text. (Barthes dissection and articulation).
Jakobson's essays are also about decomposing and reconstructing a text only he speaks of similarity and contiguity. In "Two Aspects of Language and Two Types of Aphasic Disturbances" he says there are two types of discourse:
In "From Linguistics and Poetics" (The Critical Tradition: Classic Texts and Contemporary Trends, Third Edition, David H. Richter, Bedford/St. Martin's, Boston, NY, 2007 p 852-9) Jakobson argues that a distinction must be made between "literary criticism" and "literary studies":
These fundamental factors correspond to six "functions" of language:
(images taken from Dr. Richard Clarke LITS3304 Notes 05A).
The Referential function is denotative and cognitive; what the message is about.
The Emotive function expresses the Addresser's attitude to the situation as given in the context and is generally seen in sentences like 'Tut! Tut!'.
The Conative function indicates the addresser's orientation to the addressee and is generally seen in the imperative or declarative sentences.
The Phatic function is seen in language that is meant to check that a connection still exists between the addresser and addressee e.g. "Did you hear me?"
The Metalinguistic function involves things to do with the language itself e.g. "What's a 'metalanguage'?"
The Poetic/Aesthetic function has to do with the form the message takes.
While the Context/Referential "...is the leading task of numerous messages..." (855), the other functions also play their parts. These factors/functions can be objectively analyzed and, he further claims, only declarative statements can be subjected to a truth-test although overall, he states that "...truth values...exceed the bounds of poetics and linguistics in general." (853).
In short, we may objectively analyze a text and judge its literary merits without saying anything about the truth or falsity of the message. We may also find, during our analysis, that one particular function will be dominant and, usually, we describe something as being literary when the poetic function is the dominant.
Prof. Fry does point out a problem between the poetic and metalingual functions, which he says Jakobson himself realized but considered solved by the following observation:
The key difference between Formalism and Structuralism is the way in which a text is deconstructed. Formalism takes a text apart to see how it works; Structuralism breaks a text into is constituent parts for the purpose of generating material which may then be used to reconstruct a virtual copy of the original text. (Barthes dissection and articulation).
Jakobson's essays are also about decomposing and reconstructing a text only he speaks of similarity and contiguity. In "Two Aspects of Language and Two Types of Aphasic Disturbances" he says there are two types of discourse:
- Metaphoric - where one topic leads to another through their "similarity", and
- Metonymy - where one topic leads to another through their "contiguity"; their logical connection to one another (metonymy is defined as "the use of the name of one object for that of another to which it is related or a part i.e. "the bottle" for "strong drink")
He goes on to say there are two aspects to both these methods of discourse: positional and semantic; we select words based on the syntax we follow and for their meaning and those meanings can be based on metaphor or metonymy.
...the interaction of these two elements [similarity and contiguity]...provides objective criterion...either of the two relations can appear, and each in either of two aspects [syntactical or semantic]...Either of the two gravitational poles [metaphoric or metonymy] may prevail. (130)In prose metonymy may prevail over selections as we are more apt to be concerned with the way words are logically combined while in poetry metaphors may prevail over selections as we are primarily concerned with meaning.
"...for poetry, metaphor -- and for prose, metonymy -- is the line of least resistance" (133)While we always choose words for what they mean, at times the need for logical discourse precludes metaphoric choices. For example, on a baseball field, "Heads-up!" is likely a better choice than "Here comes the horse-hide orb, flying high overhead" if you don't want your team mate to get knocked on the noggin' by a fly ball.
In "From Linguistics and Poetics" (The Critical Tradition: Classic Texts and Contemporary Trends, Third Edition, David H. Richter, Bedford/St. Martin's, Boston, NY, 2007 p 852-9) Jakobson argues that a distinction must be made between "literary criticism" and "literary studies":
...the terminological confusion of "literary studies" with "criticism" tempts the student of literature to replace the description of the intrinsic value of a literary work with the subjective, censorious verdict....no manifesto foisting a critic's own tastes and opinions on creative literature, can serve as a substitute for an objective scholarly analysis of verbal art." (853)He claims every language "...encompasses several concurrent patterns, each characterized by different functions." (854) and lists the "fundamental factors" of language as:
 |
(images taken from Dr. Richard Clarke LITS3304 Notes 05A).
The Referential function is denotative and cognitive; what the message is about.
The Emotive function expresses the Addresser's attitude to the situation as given in the context and is generally seen in sentences like 'Tut! Tut!'.
The Conative function indicates the addresser's orientation to the addressee and is generally seen in the imperative or declarative sentences.
The Phatic function is seen in language that is meant to check that a connection still exists between the addresser and addressee e.g. "Did you hear me?"
The Metalinguistic function involves things to do with the language itself e.g. "What's a 'metalanguage'?"
The Poetic/Aesthetic function has to do with the form the message takes.
While the Context/Referential "...is the leading task of numerous messages..." (855), the other functions also play their parts. These factors/functions can be objectively analyzed and, he further claims, only declarative statements can be subjected to a truth-test although overall, he states that "...truth values...exceed the bounds of poetics and linguistics in general." (853).
In short, we may objectively analyze a text and judge its literary merits without saying anything about the truth or falsity of the message. We may also find, during our analysis, that one particular function will be dominant and, usually, we describe something as being literary when the poetic function is the dominant.
Prof. Fry does point out a problem between the poetic and metalingual functions, which he says Jakobson himself realized but considered solved by the following observation:
Poetry and metalanguage...are in diametrical opposition to each other: in metalanguage the sequence is used to build an equation, whereas in poetry the equation is used to build a sequence. (858)Using Jakobson's function structure, the addresser must select and combine symbols/words from the functions in a binary fashion i.e. similar/dissimilar, same/opposite. If Prof. Fry says "It's raining" how do you know which function he's using? Emotive? Phatic? You need to infer his intention. And the same holds true when you need to make a distinction between any of the parts or entities in a text and once you infer intention you are no longer being objective.