System stylistics bases
Structural units of the speech system: linguistics, speech, text systems
Understanding the language as a hierarchical system is focused on the reflective (nominative) and cognitive (cognitive) functions of the language. In the mid-twentieth century, when the leading branch of linguistics was structural linguistics, it was required to defend the very need to go beyond the system of the language of the nominating and counterpose to it the system of language functioning, although the ideas of AA Potebni, LV Shcherba, GO Vinokur , V. V. Vinogradov definitely led to functionalism in linguistics. The problem of verbal systemic nature began to be closely developed in the second half of the 20th century.
In the works of MN Kozhina, the concept of speech systemic nature received both a fundamental justification and an extended application in the practice of stylistic analysis. The basic position here is the recognition of verbal systemic nature not by modification and not by reorganization of the linguistic system, but by building on a fundamentally different basis. The most important here is the conditioning of the speech system by extralinguistic factors, including the goals and tasks of those who speak in their speech activity, determined not only by subjective (individual) intentions, but by the appointment in socium of certain activities and related spheres of communication. Speech system is based on the ideas of expediency (speech is relevant to the target areas of its application) and goal-setting (speech reflects the idea of its carrier).
At the present time, the general recognition of verbal systemic nature has already occurred, which, however, does not mean the exhaustion of the question of the speech system. For a specific analysis of speech system, it is necessary to refine the terminology apparatus and methods of studying the speech system.
The distinction between language and speech, with different bases of systematization of one and the other object, in modern linguistics is indisputable: the language system is built on a nominative basis; the speech system - on another, communicative. It is inappropriate to absolutize the differences. Language and speech are a multifunctional multifunctional phenomenon, the various hypostases of which do not deny the internal unity of the object and its general material basis.
The question of the systemic nature of any complex object depends on the definition of the composition of its constituent units and the features of their interrelation (the structure of the object). The question of interconnection is generally resolved: in functioning, structurally heterogeneous units reflect a certain sphere of activity and are combined on the basis of a common communicative task. However, it is impossible to build a system of speech units that carry out this task on the reflective principle: then in the lexicon we will receive only thematic groups, each of which reflects a certain type of activity (vocabulary of science, religion, politics, etc.), and grammar will deliver we are at a dead end (how, for example, does the part of speech or the case form relate to the type of activity?).
The composition of appropriately selected units should be specified not only by circumstances, but also by some independent force in relation to them, closely and directly related to the language, and this force is thinking. The activation of linguistic units of different levels, guided by a common communicative task, occurs "depending on the purposes and tasks of communication in a particular social sphere, from the corresponding form of thinking that appears in it" . The unification of different units is, therefore, also from the point of view of a certain idea, which constitutes the intellectual core of the text.
Functional stylistics came to this understanding on the basis of studying the specifics of individual functional styles. In the monograph by VG Kostomarov "Russian language on the newspaper strip" The term constructive principle of the newspaper language, consisting of a simultaneous and equitable orientation toward expression and standard, was introduced. Formation of the concept 'constructive principle' became possible when considering the journalistic variety of the literary language in the light of the theory of communication. The peculiarities of production and perception of the newspaper text, the nature of the connection between the form of speech expression and the channel for transmitting and receiving information, the availability of informative and expressive information processing programs were taken into account. The constructive principle as an impolitic with respect to the speech form of the text, the intellectual-communicative impulse, like a magnet, draws to itself all the means suitable for its implementation and acts in the processes of generating new and new texts.
Subsequently, this idea develops, as a result of which the constructive principle, or the dominant style, is revealed for most functional styles. It is established, for example, that the scientific style is oriented toward generality and underlined logic, artistic - to figurative concretization. There is no doubt a close interrelation between the constructive principle and the type of thinking: scientific speech is associated with theoretical (conceptual-logical) thinking, business with regulatory, and artistic with associative imagery. The type of content is also important: in a scientific speech this is a new knowledge of the deep laws of reality, in the journalistic it is facts of reality in their social significance. In general, having formulated a constructive principle, the stylist gets a general idea of the communicative basis that determines the selection of those, not other units and increasing the frequency of the selected ones. In the course of analysis, this view unfolds into a detailed description of the means of verbal expression of a constructive idea.
The question of units of stylistic description is developed to a lesser extent. The basic unit of the speech system is considered to be the utterance - speech correlation of the sentence as a system-linguistic unit. The term utterance stands for & quot; a speech unit formatted according to the laws of the given language & quot; that transmits the speaker's communicative setting. Also used is the term phrase, primarily denoting the intonation-syntactic analogue of the sentence. We add to them the terms expression and utterance, blurred in meaning. All of them in the most general form indicate the structured nature of the units of functioning, without underlining the communicative conditioning of this functioning.
The terminological expands, thereby demonstrating that linguistics and the style of speech are no longer satisfied with the availability of traditional terms. At the present time, there are a number of terminological proposals, in each of which one or another significant feature of the verbal object is grasped - a verbal construct that is stably connected with a specific purpose and conditions of communication: composition-stylistic form (M.M. Bakhtin), speech act (YaB), speech genre (SES), speech/dynamic/combinatorial model (AN Vasiliev), communicative fragment (BM Gasparov) as applied to the dialogue: speech act (M. M. Bakhtin), speech, speech step ( PV Zernetsk s), and others.
Note that almost all of the above terms are correlated with the syntactic units of the language (sentence, rarely - word combination). Meanwhile, units of speech are not only constructions, but also individual words (actualized lexical and morphological units of the linguistic system), and even individual morphemes (morphs) and phonemes (sounds). A massive survey of the specifics of the functioning of the lexical and grammatical units of the language system in scientific and colloquial functional styles has already been carried out. As a result, the probabilistic-statistical dependence of the lexico-grammatical composition of the functional style on the sphere of application of speech, the form of public consciousness, the type of thinking, has been convincingly proved. But how to correlate this composition with the composition of statements?
The question of identifying the basic units of speech in their individuality and interdependence remains open, and in fact, without a response to this question, a complete linguistic description of speech phenomena is impossible. Let us imagine a general typology of speech units that are linked together hierarchically. The initial assumptions are the following. Since the functional nature of the speech system is axiomatic, and any unit of the system must have all the basic properties of the systemic whole in a withdrawn form, only the functional manifestations of the language can be accepted as units of the speech system. At the same time, since language and speech are a holistic phenomenon with a single material substratum, the concept of speech systemic nature can be built on the scientific notion of the language system. As the strong parallels of terms (morpheme/morph, sentence/utterance, etc.), which have developed in system linguistics, are precisely this way the most reliable, although there are actually semiotics and complex theories of speech systemicity proposed.
The speech system can not be a linguistic one, but the structural analogy of these systems is quite possible. Suppose that the speech system is built on a different basis, according to the same laws of system formation as the language system. To test this assumption, we will attempt an attempt at a systemic view of speech (functional manifestations of the language in any volume) and text (communicatively adequate purposeful speech realization of the author's intention) from the positions of system-language structuring. As already noted, in accordance with the general theory of multi-level systems (in our case, the sign system of natural language is taken as the initial one), each level of hierarchically organized integrity consists of the same units, and the relations between the lower and upper levels are constructed in the form of a 'means-function '. We take into account the provision on the presence of the highest verbal level of the language system - the textual level.
Let's start with the elementary units of the speech system. It is clear that all speech works are built on the basis of elementary units of the language foundation. At the same time, the whole semantic and stylistic potential of the linguistic unit is not realized in any speech variety. It should be updated by some of its side, necessary to achieve a communicative goal. Thus, the elementary unit of the speech system is not just a linguistic unit, but a unit that is actualized, involved in the process of communication. It can be a word in the form of a word form, as well as a morpheme in the form of a morph, a phoneme in the form of a sound, a stable word combination in a context-specific manifestation, a structural sentence tense within the context of a hyperphrasic context. Formally semantically, these units are not designed and not changed, they are taken from the language fund and adapted to use according to common system rules. The actualized language means, ready for use in speech, will be denoted by the term lingvema.
In addition to lingvem, speech operates with a huge number of speech structures, a significant part of which is typical. The description of such constructions is usually conducted within the framework of research of speech stereotypes, stylistic figures and other groupings of language units. A comprehensive scientific systematization of speech structures is absent until now.
Any combination or other construction of a lingueme, which corresponds to a certain communicative predetermination, constitutes a speech unit of a higher level of the speech system. The speech as a structural unit of a functional system is built from a linguistic system, it is associated not only with the selection of its components from the linguistic fund, but also with some operation over primary units: their union and/or transformation. This is a functional integrity, combinatorial education, involved in the embodiment of the author's intention. Leading varieties of speech - a free phrase, the implementation of speech reception, functional-semantic type of speech.
The level of the text is characterized by the action of even more complex in a constructive way formations - compositions formed by units of the underlying levels. These typologically reproducible verbal unity carry in itself general textual meanings. We introduce for their designation the term tekstema, which allows us to directly indicate this role. Tekstema is a sequence appropriately selected by a lingua and speech. Unlike the speech, it is meaningfully connected with the general text author's concept, the author's speech strategy. The structural specificity of tekstemy is that it is a composition, i.e. an integrated structured unity of heterogeneous means, reproduced within the framework of a certain text type (individual author, genre, functional-style). In the speech hierarchy, text systems are based on units of the lower level, with the addition of a special characteristic: the placement of constituent units in the text, taking into account the strong and weak positions of the latter.
The main difference between the two types of structured units-the Rook and the Tekstem-is as follows. The problem is combinatorial and is determined by the interaction model of the components. The textema is composite and is determined by the purposeful sequence and placement of a number of more elementary units in the text (based on the selection and combinatorial properties of the components). The main types of text - a text category (lingua and rechem composition, characterized by the general sense typical positional relationship of selected units and their arrangement in space of the whole speech) and microtext
The hierarchy of structural units of the speech-text system built in this way is not identical with the linguistic one, however, the structural similarity of these systems is undoubted. Like the language system, the speech system has inter-level bifunctional zones. Thus, the syntax turns out to be "the servant of two masters": syntactic linguistic structures are structurally similar, and in this respect similar to speech, and functional-semantic types of speech (description, narrative, reasoning) "work"; both at the level of speech structures, and at the general level.
The term communism can be used as a general notation for a system-speech unit, if necessary. He clearly points to communication as the domain of connection of speech with the conditions of verbal communication. Communicables are any units of speech interaction that assume a certain communicative purpose and are conditioned by the communicative situation.
The term is communicated is not as multifactorial as a speech genre, which is essential for a system-wide concept. In it, neither the structure of the phenomenon (as in the term model), nor the activity aspect of the latter (as in terms of speech act, act, step, move) is brought to the fore. Finally , which is especially important, the term communicates opens the possibility of its application not only in relation to structures, but also to functionally specialized elementary tools (among them, for example, the lexical-semantic variant of the word, nominative case, present verbal reporting time). This term does not characterize the speech unit by its level membership, which opens the possibility of a field approach to speech material with the functional equating of means of different language levels. This term has a parallel communicative to indicate a specific verbal manifestation of the communiqué. This, finally, is an economical single-word term, which is important for his own being in scientific speech.
In the general series of "emic units" (cf .: phoneme, morpheme, lexeme), the term communicum stands for & quot; extension to speech & quot; language system and indicates that the stereotype of the functioning of the language unit is preserved by the language consciousness in a generalized form and is replicated in similar processes of speech communication. Reproducibility of the speech form and functional meaning in the same type of communication is a necessary condition for the existence of communism.
Once again, briefly, we will represent the hierarchy of concepts. In terms of the degree of complexity, communism are divided into: a) primary - formed on the basis of a certain type of language units, or lingvem; b) structural first order, representing a combination of linguistic, or speech; c) structural second order, emerging on the composite, i.e. text level, or text systems. Tekstemy constructed from lingvem and speech.
This approach is purely structural in nature. When you add a substantial base, you can distinguish various types of communism, for example, style (scientific, journalistic, etc.) and inter-style; pragmatic (formal and informal, categorical and non-categorical); and others
Terminology system of emits & quot; units of speech and text reveals the overall structural configuration of the speech system in conjunction with the level system of language. The concepts of 'lingvema', 'rechem' and 'textema' are important for the completeness and consistency of the stylistic description. This model allows us to outline a consistent plan for a functional-linguistic study of any communicative phenomenon. According to this plan (the presentation of a typical commune style from simple to complex), functional styles of the Russian literary language will be described below. It should be noted that the stylistic description does not imply the analysis of all communes, it is impossible, and not necessary. Style is described by specific and at the same time repeating, typical manifestations. How can they be distinguished against the background of inertial speech mass?
None, even the largest variety of the language used (functional style) does not absorb all linguistic means. In substantiating the concept of 'functional style' M. II. Kozhina notes how important it is to take into account the selection of ready-made units from the linguistic fund, as well as the action not essential for the language system, but the paramount criterion of the frequency of selected linguistic units in speech. Frequency refers to the degree of frequency (repeatability) of any language means, i.e. their quantitative characteristics within a particular functional style, or other linear speech series. The degree of significance of the means (group of funds) is directly proportional to its (its) frequency. This necessitates the use of statistical methods in the study of speech and the use of quantitative-comparative data to substantiate the specificity of different styles. It is on the basis of selection and frequency of units that an appropriate communicative unity of different linguistic means is formed, a certain stylistic image of speech and text is created.
Increasing the frequency of use of any commune can be considered as an indicator of functional specialization, objective and accessible for external observation. Typical increase in frequency under certain conditions demonstrates the fixity of the reproduced speech medium for a certain type of communicative situation and corresponding to the specific goal of the speaker. A typical sharp drop in frequency or the absence of communism is also indicative in stylistic terms, as it forms "negative indicators of style" (M. N. Kozhin). Communism, taken from the point of view of selection and frequency, forms a style - another "emic unit", no longer proper structural, but speech and textual. The style indicates preferences in selection and increase in the frequency of the speech unit, corresponding to the goal of the speaker and the communicative certainty of speech (or lowering the frequency, excluding non-corresponding units). Style - this is the characteristic feature of speech identity.
How to ...
We made your life easier with putting together a big number of articles and guidelines on how to plan and write different types of assignments (Essay, Research Paper, Dissertation etc)