ebotson, age ety he, mer 10, Prague ROMAN JAKOBSON Language in Literature‘Cop © or by The kobon Tre Agi ed ‘ron te Unie Ste of Ameria “Thi tok print ci apr nd binding mutes sneer chosen org and dasa ary of Congres Catling Pion Dt obo, Roman 9 “angus eae Lear» Pei Seni. 1 Pomona, Key Ri, Sion IL Te, PNahs sh too toner ISBN Caresns alk ape) CONTENTS Insotuction by Krsna Fomorska 1 PART 1 Question of Literary Theory 1 OnReaismin Are 19 2 Facuien 28 3 Dela 4 MeDominant 41 5 Prob in he Soy of Language and Lier (Jor) Tynes) 47 6 Language ia Open $0 Lingus and Poets 62 8 Two Aspects of Languge acd Two Types of Aas Divurbaness 98 PART IL Grammar in Poctry 9. Potro Geammarand Gamat of Posty at 10 Gamma! Paral ns Rasa Fact 45 1 Bankie“Les Cha” ith Che LiiSeaus) 180 12 Shakespear Vel Artin TH Eapenee of Spi” (woth. ones) 108 1 Yes *Sorow of Love” trough he Yeats (th Stephen Kay) 16CHAPTER: On Realism in Art Un rcently, the hitory of ar, purely that of Kraut, fas had more in common with caweie than with scholarship. It obeyed al the laws of causere, skipping Bithely fom topic ro topic, ‘rom Isa esione on the ekgance of forms to snecdote rom she artist’ if, from psehological ers to questions concerning pl ‘ophicalsgnicance and social environment, Iris a rating and cay tank to cha about if and times using erry work aa ass itis more gratiffng and easier wo copy from apse east than to draw ving body i cassere we are slpsod wih or teminoogys in fet, ‘ariations in tems and cquivocations so apt to punning often lend considerable charm to the conversion, The history of at has een ‘sally sishod with respect to schol rerminologyIehas employed ‘he current vocabullry without sxening the words cridcally whout ‘ening them precisely, and widhoue considering the muleplicy of| ‘cir meanings, For example, historias of iterature unconsconably «confused the idealism denoting a spec philosophical doctrine with 2 Toor idealism denoing behavior mosiated by other than narow Considerations of material gain. Soil more hopes was che wed of =Why grea nas paint peen”—"But why?" Scie hadertogus?Thi det con he anne: ths ei eect deity cognition bring ot anew err, the Dewy ‘proved epithe. Exaggeaion in ar naval, wrote Dox toni onder show an objects to defo the shape ued aes ms eis fi rales oe wed under te ttewcope ae ted. You clr your object nan orginal way and {Tink tits become more ppb dewey more eal A). Ina ‘Glass picture singe objec lipid and shown fom sora pois of ews made more pe This i device wed sefng. Bure abo posible te motte ands tis devie TRe panting el ante doubled when eee in a ror The Sti eof cnn Th rng en ee a at taring epithe: ei a te pe becomes 2 io ESwhy i you pie to" The autor wil ays have an ane, thei Better bony ne ight anoner: "To make ae 8 sa sane tem my be ft onan objet or ase as 3 partelr apt fe Neptve pralllam explicl recs metaphor {Esato forks proper es Tam nota ue, Iam a woman” ‘Spe the pln poo by the Cosh poet Sree Thi itary eon Suction efile, fom a apeeal marate Rte, an be tome deal of plot development “Some std Tse ate dhe foe rns ofan erin certo, Noy thse ao the mins Fam cine wes Cura Pea psing by inves nega fram rjc noma om ad employs a map The Srimek pcm qured cai“ am nota woman, Taare” the following rom 3 py by anther Cach pet, Capek: "What i thie a hndlcehct Durie nna hanes beaui roman snding bythe window: Shes drew alin whe an i Cieaming of lve) Tr Rosan cove als, copulation i equ sae in serms of inte parle te vane ie oF wing tongs, Wh the irene that in the lates the constatons sing Metaphors te not Cooly usted, whe he former see mceaphors nd mocaton sSthe easy whith the conning hero ca sac he mayo 3.55 mepreatn of human copulation by an animal incapable of On Retin in Art comprehending it. From time to time, the consistet modiation and justication of poetic contractions have also ben cal els. Thus the Czech novelist Capek-Chod in is tal, “The Westemmost Sls” Sil lls the fis chap, in which romani” faneasy is mote by typhoid dlr, a ealtiechaper™ ‘Lec us use to designate such elsm, i.e rpuiement of mi tent motoution and rection of poetic dene ‘This Eis often conned ‘sth CB, and 50 08. BY fling to distinguish among the variety of | concepts latent inthe term “eam theorescans and historians of ar-—in particular, of iterature—are acing a ifthe term were abot tomles ack into which everthing and anything could be conve: eny drown, “This objection may be made: No, noe eveything. No one wil all Hofmann fantastic ales realistic. But does this not india that there ‘s somehow single meaning in the word "clism,” that here i afer all some common denominator? ‘My answer is: No one wl alla "key" a “lock” bu this docs not mean thatthe word lock” has only one mang. We cannot equate ‘sith impnity the various meanings ofthe word “reals” jas 38 We anaot, unless we wish © be called mad, equate a hair lock with 3 padlock. Te iste tha dhe various meanings of some words (fr ex ple “il” are far more distinct from one anode tha they ae in the eae of che word “realism” where we can imagine ase offs bout which we could simultaneously sy “this realm inthe mea ing CB, or of the word” Nevertheless inexcusable ro confine (G'B, Ay, and 50 on. A teem once use in American slang t0 denote a socialyinepe person was *eurkey” There are probably “wskeys™ in Turkey, and there are doubles men named Harry who are Beso with great amounss of aie Bue we should no jmp 10 conchsons| Conceming the social apeindes of the Turks or the hairiness of ‘men named Hlary. Ths “Commandment is self-evident co the point of inbecty, yer those who speak of attic reali continual sin ainsi