Metaphorical and Rhetorical Language

The Overall Stylistic Analysis of Non-Fiction Discourse.

The publicistic style belongs to the formal variety of English. It is “the language of mass communication which is used not only to inform but also to convince and persuade, i.e. its functions are referential, conative and, to some degree, poetical ”. [1:89]

The general aim of publicistic style is to exert influence on public opinion through logical argumentation and emotional appeal. Logical argumentation is provided by coherent and logical syntactical structures, connectives and paragraphing.

Emotional appeal is achieved by the use of words with emotive meaning and various connotations, as well as phonetic, lexical and stylistic devices. The used stylistic devices are closely interwoven and mutually complementary thus building up an intricate pattern. For example, antithesis is framed by parallel constructions, which in their turn are accompanied by repetition. Climax/ gradation can be formed by repetitions of different kinds, such as anaphoric repetition, framing, linking or reduplication/ anadiplosis, chain repetition and epiphora.

The stylistic device of repetition aims at logical emphasis, it fixes the attention of the reader/ listener on the key word of the utterance and intensifies the whole utterance too. Repetition is also resorted to in order to convince the audience, to add weight to the author’s opinion.

A variety of repetition is synonymical repetition. Synonymous words and phrases add a slightly different nuance of meaning and intensify the impact of the utterance.

Repetition can be regarded as the most typical stylistic device of English oratorical style as well as parallel constructions, antithesis, suspense, climax, rhetorical questions and question-in-the-narrative. [2: 87]

Sara Thorne points out that the words and structures politicians use create a certain view of the world. This world view will be directly linked to their purpose and audience and will affect the language they choose in order to achieve a set goal.

Political discourse is marked by the pragmatical purport. Thus it is important to consider the meaning beyond what has actually been said, to concentrate on the way meaning is constructed in different contexts. The focus here is therefore wider than just the lexis and syntax itself. The factors influencing a speaker or writer’s choices should also be analyzed.

Political language can be informative (referential function) or persuasive (conative function) and is often rhetorical. It is always useful to consider the speaker or writer, the audience, the purpose and the context of any publicistic discourse because each of these factors can change the nature of the language used. [4: 369]

What to Look for in Publicistic Texts

Register

1. What is the mode? – written or oral.

2. What is the field? – the subject matter, the theme/s tackled and the author’s approach to it/ them.

3. What is the manner? – the relationship (formal or informal) between the participants (author/ speaker and reader/ listener):

a) Are there any pronouns bringing the speaker and the audience together? – giving an individual tone and suggesting a sincere attitude by repeating or ‘blocking’ the I particularly with mental process verbs (think, feel or believe)? establishing a rapport with the audience by using the I? linking issues and policies to a particular person by using his, hers and theirs, thus placing an emphasis on people rather than policies/ focusing on the institution as well as the individual by using we, thus including the speaker and suggesting support for actions or policies? drawing the audience in by using you?

b) Are there any pronouns creating a sense of distance – dividing the author and audience by using those? conveying a sense of opposition by using they? creating a very formal tone by using one as a first or second person personal reference? distancing the speaker from an action or conveying a sense of authority by using one?

4. What is the purport and ideology of the discourse (to inform, persuade, mobilize, inspire, uplift the

spirits, celebrate and so on).

Lexis

1. Are the words chosen formal or informal?

2. Are there any subject-specific words?

3. What are the connotations of words chosen?

4. Are the adjectives used to express precise detail or for making the text emotive/ biased/ conveying a distinctive point of view?

5. What kinds of adverbials (of time/ of place/ of manner) are used as deictic markers?

Grammar

1. What is the sentence structure? – (simple/ compound/ complex sentences)

2. Is the sentence structure varied? – (simple/ compound/ complex variety: a) simple sentences making direct and emphatic statements, b) compound sentences balancing arguments, c) complex sentences exploring abstract concepts).

3. Is the passive voice used with or without an agent?

Metaphorical and Rhetorical Language

1. Do any metaphor, simile, oxymoron and the effects created by any SDs help establish a dramatic/ tragic/ solemn atmosphere? Make abstract issues more concrete? Create poetic and descriptive effects?

2. Is there any repetition-emphasis on key words/phrases/clauses, making the text more dramatic or notable and/ or highlighting a moral point?

3. Are there “periodic” sentences built on the stylistic inversion of the regular word order (S-P-O-Adv.)? The “periodic” sentence is a sentence which either wholly postpones the most important idea, or else delays its completion, until the very end. E.g. Love, as everyone knows, except those who happen to be afflicted with it, is blind. [1:24]

4. Is there any parallelism? – creating a sense of balance? Adding weight to the message of the text?

5. Are there any examples of antithesis? – creating contrasts between good and evil/ Justice and injustice/ equality and inequality/ the white and the black, etc.

The List of Literature Quoted:

1. L.M. Beskrovna. “A Way from Analytical Reading to Analytical Writing” – Kyiv, 2004, pp. 108 – 113.

2. I.R. Galperin. Stylistics. – Moscow, 1981, pp. 287 – 292.

3. V.A. Maltzev. Essays on English Stylistics. – Minsk, 1984, p. 89.

4. Sara Thorne. Mastering Advanced English Language. Macmillan Press Ltd, London, 1997.

© Lyudmilla I. Serdyukova, Associate Professor, English Philology Department, Horlivka State Pedagogical Institute of Foreign Languages, Horlivka, 2012.

Дата добавления: 2015-10-29