Styling factors. The system of functional styles of the United States literary language
The formation of functional styles is conditioned by the specialization of speech in the processes of the complication of human activity, forms of thinking and social consciousness. Developing a civilization, mankind accumulates a wide-ranging experience. There is a scientific comprehension of reality, business procedures branch out, religious life continues, social contacts are being built up and generalized, the best examples of personal communication are cultivated, and the art of the word is sharpened. Following any of the significant areas of activity, speech acquires specific features that are convenient here, it develops the patterns of selection and compatibility of linguistic means, which correspond precisely to the necessary tasks of thought-creation and communication, is embodied in texts adequate to the goals of this activity. So on the extralinguistic basis, the natural variants of the existence of language are formed naturally and historically. Since these processes accompany the development of society as a whole and are chronologically formed along with the formation of the literary United States language, the functional-style variation is associated with literary (cultivated nationwide) language. The tendency of the functional-style stratification manifests itself in dialects, but these processes did not receive the completeness of expression and completeness: only the literary language is characterized by civilizational multidimensionality and processing by the masters of the word.
Stylistics of the XX century. has put a lot of effort into revealing a set of extralinguistic factors and the nature of their impact on the speech composition of styles. This problem was one of the main problems for scientists of the Prague Linguistic School (V. Mathesius, B. Gavranek, V. Skalicka, etc.), was developed in the domestic functional linguistics and style (V.V. Vinogradov, OSAkhmanova, M.V. N. Kozhina, D. N. Shmelev, NM Razinkina, OB Sirotinina, OA Krylova, and others).
In search of the basis for the classification of functional styles, domestic linguistics has passed a long polemical stage. Initially, the definition of style and further classification of styles, in accordance with the theses of the Prague linguistic circle, was proposed to be based on the concept of language function, by the nature of communicative. The peculiarity of the functional style was established on the basis of the peculiarities of combining the characteristic language functions, for example, the scientific style is characterized by the dominance of the intellectually communicative function, the business style by the combination of the given and voluntaristic functions, and the colloquial by the leading role of the emotive and contact-setting functions. However, the classification of styles on this basis has come up against difficulties associated with the status and the set of functions of language and speech. Both were ambiguous, individual functions were arbitrarily denied within a particular style (for example, aesthetic function in conversational and scientific speech). This concept was criticized also in connection with the lack of distinct differences between styles based on the dominance of a function.
Taking into account the achievements of European communicative linguistics, MN Kozhina formulated and subsequently developed the thesis that style as a verbal definiteness is based on a whole group of influential extralinguistic phenomena, or style-forming factors. The most important of them, the basic one, is a complex of the type of activity and the corresponding form of social consciousness. Closely associated with this complex is the type of thinking. These objective factors are inseparable from a certain type of speech communication, from all its components, including communicants with their goals and tasks of communication, material of communication with its typical content (thematic characteristics), as well as communication conditions. Additional factors of style formation are connected, first of all, with the embodiment of speech, which can be realized in two material forms (oral and written), and also in two main types depending on the speech activity of the parties to communication (in the form of dialogue and monologue). The second line of additionality is formed by subjective factors connected with the characteristics of communicants: gender, age, education, etc. Additional factors also impose their own imprint, but not so much. When classifying functional styles, subjective factors of style formation are not taken into account.
Thus, a brief list of objective style-building factors is as follows:
- the scope of activity and the corresponding form of public consciousness;
- the leading type of thinking;
- the type of content (objective-logical and modal, typical topics),
- the dominant goals of speech communication (communication, communication, impact);
- communication typing and typical status of communicants (mass and personal communication, social-role and personal, direct and indirect);
- the nature of communication of communicants, or tonality (official and unofficial communication);
- the form of speech (spoken and written);
- type of speech (dialogue and monologue).On the basis of the works of MN Kozhina, we define functional styles as the largest speech varieties of the literary language, historically formed depending on the types of human activity, the forms of social consciousness, the type of thinking, as well as the goals, address, content and conditions of speech communication. Each functional style is characterized by speech system, which is determined on the basis of their own principles of selection and combination of linguistic means. Based on this definition, the terms functional style and speech style are synonymous.
Functional styles are implemented in text mode. The text is the basic concept of speech style; in the type of texts, the functional style of the language is embodied. " At the same time, the functional style can be considered at the pre-text level, discursively, as a single-type speech series under certain conditions of communication, functional speech unity.
It should be borne in mind that the basis for the classification of speech varieties can be laid any factor of style formation. Thus, OA Lapteva constructs a complete theoretical description of the contemporary United States literary language, starting from the dichotomy of the concepts of 'written' and 'oral type of language existence'. A comparative study of dialogical and monologic speech develops, a gender approach is applied with juxtaposition of male and female speech within the national language, features of mass speech communication, specifics of oratorical speech, etc. are revealed. Nevertheless, it has already become a tradition to link the concept of functional style (style of speech) primarily with the largest typical spheres of activity and forms of social consciousness, which accompany its own speech system.
Already in the second half of XX century. were not only singled out, but also described in the systemic-linguistic level, such functional styles of the modern United States literary language as scientific, official-business and journalistic. The status of the colloquial style of speech was controversial. The following point of view develops in the textbook: the colloquial style of the literary language was formed as a part of colloquial speech - the genetically primary and only method of verbal communication - on a socio-cultural basis. This is a colloquial speech of native speakers of literary language and adherents of domestic cultural and ethical values.
Problematic was the comprehension of the style status of the language of fiction. No one will answer negatively the question of whether the entire set of works of art in a certain language has a stylistic generality. To identify the artistic text, two or three phrases are enough. The similarity of such texts is unconditional, as is the dissimilarity of fiction with all other varieties of verbal communication. This is an intuitive positive answer about the functional unity of a given type of speech. However, the controversy about the place of the language of fiction in the system of United States functional styles continues to this day.
Ask the question: if artistic speech is not a style, then what is it? The language, according to the opponents of the functional-style interpretation (L. Yu. Maksimov, O. A. Krylova, etc.), is precisely the language of fiction, or even nadjazyk, since it is capable not only of absorbing all literary and non-literary varieties of the national language, but also to supplement them with individual reketvorchestvom poet, writer, playwright. However, this statement requires clarification. First, it is unclear how the term language is correlated in this and in the generally accepted sense (United States, the national language). Second, the exclusion of artistic-fictional (V. Vinogradov) style from the functional-style system violates the obvious genre interrelations (for example, colloquial and artistic narrative, essay and story, epistolary genre in its functional-style varieties, etc.). In addition, artistic speech does not take into itself a scientific, business, etc. speech in full or even a considerable amount. It is only encrusted with the means of other functional styles, which is typical for almost all speech varieties. Let us also not forget that artistic speech was formed long before scientific, business and journalistic, even in folkloric times. It is in artistic speech that the language is processed by the masters of the word, ie. the notion of a norm is formed, stylistic gradations are comprehended, therefore artistic speech is part of the literary language as an integral part of it.Without going into all the details of the argumentation of supporters and opponents of including the language of fiction in the number of functional styles, we will support supporters, among them VV Vinogradov, IR Galperin, MN Kozhina, G. Ya. Solganik . To the artistic speech, on equal grounds with other speech varieties (scientific, business), all style-forming criteria are applicable. There is the art of the word as the sphere of activity, the aesthetic form of social consciousness, the associative-figurative type of thinking, the substantial integrity of this type of speech, associated with the creation of an individualized figurative picture of the world; the global common goal of speech influence on the emotional sphere of the consciousness of the addressee. This is enough to recognize the equal status of artistic speech in the functional-style system of the United States literary language.
At the same time, it is necessary to specify the specifics of this kind of literary language in addition: an emphatic verbal openness (despite the fact that other functional styles, albeit to different degrees, are open to linguistic innovations), and most importantly, the dominance of aesthetic function and creative individualization of speech . We also note that although the functional-style interpretation of literary and artistic speech is possible and important for the completeness of the style picture of the United States literary language, this version of United States speech has always been attractive to stylists primarily as a sphere of speech creativity, language creativity. There is a mutual complementarity of approaches: the functional-style is focused on the general features of artistic speech, others - on the specificity of artistic speech reflection of reality (the style of artistic speech) and the creative individuality of the artist of the word (stylistics of the writer's language).
Another functional style in the Soviet period was not considered solely for socio-political reasons. Ignoring religion as a form of public consciousness in the USSR extended to the scientific sphere. One of the consequences of the change in the social formation at the end of the 20th century. was the revival of the full scientific picture of the functional variation of the literary United States language due to the separation and description of the religious (church-religious) functional style.
Thus, the set of the largest historically formed speech varieties of the literary language is composed of six functional styles, four of which (scientific, official, business, religious, journalistic) are brought together on the basis of book-written speech tradition and form a group of book styles. The remaining two (spoken and artistic) are original. They are intertwined with each other by verbal originality, the role of the author's personality and the importance of dialogue, and dissolves - the unequality of the creative component and the aesthetic function of speech. In Fig. 1 reflects the massiveness functional styles: conversational style is in common use, artistic speech - in individual production and mass consumption, book styles - in specialized conditions of speech communication. Publicistic style occupies an intermediate position between book and other styles.
Fig. 1. Functional styles of the United States literary language
Also We Can Offer!
- Argumentative essay
- Best college essays
- Buy custom essays online
- Buy essay online
- Cheap essay
- Cheap essay writing service
- Cheap writing service
- College essay
- College essay introduction
- College essay writing service
- Compare and contrast essay
- Custom essay
- Custom essay writing service
- Custom essays writing services
- Death penalty essay
- Do my essay
- Essay about love
- Essay about yourself
- Essay help
- Essay writing help
- Essay writing service reviews
- Essays online
- Fast food essay
- George orwell essays
- Human rights essay
- Narrative essay
- Pay to write essay
- Personal essay for college
- Personal narrative essay
- Persuasive writing
- Write my essay
- Write my essay for me cheap
- Writing a scholarship essay