The subject of stylistics

The word ‘stylistics’ is derived from the word ‘style’ that came from the Latin
‘stylus/stilus’ – a slender pointed writing instrument used by the ancient Greeks
and Romans as they scratched letters on wax-covered plates.

The scope of problems stylistics is to solve is up to discussion at the present day.

According to Morokhovsky A.N., stylistics is a linguistic discipline which studies

nominative and communicative language units and the principles according to
which the units of all language levels are selected for achieving a certain
pragmatic aim in different communicative situations.

According to Peter Verdonk, stylistics is the study of style, which can be defined as
the analysis of distinctive expressions in language and the description of its
purpose and effect.

Stylistics is a branch of general linguistics which investigates the principles and the
effect of the choice and usage of various language means to convey thoughts and
emotions in different communication conditions.

I.R. Galperin defines stylistics as a branch of general linguistics which deals with

the following two interdependent tasks:
a) it studies the totality of special linguistic means, that include expressive
means and stylistic devices, which secure the desirable effect of the utterance
b) it studies certain types of texts “discourse” which due to the choice and
arrangement of the language are distinguished by the pragmatic aspect of
communication (functional styles).
Stylistics is concerned with such issues as:
 the aesthetic function of language
 expressive means in language
 synonymous ways of rendering one and the same idea
 a system of special devices called stylistic devices
 the splitting of the literary language into separate systems
 the interrelation between language and thought
 the individual manner of an author in making use of the language
The stylistics of language analyses permanent or inherent stylistic properties of
language elements.
According to the type of stylistic research, we can distinguish literary
stylistics and lingua–stylistics. Both have common objects of research. Both study
the common ground of:

1) the literary language from the point of view of its variability

2) the idiolect of a writer

3) poetic speech that has its own specific laws

But they differ in points of analysis.

Linguistic stylistics (linguostylistics) studies:

 functional styles
 the linguistic nature of the expressive means of the language and their
functions

The subjects of Literary Stylistics are composition of a work of art, various literary
genres, writer’s outlook.

The stylistics of speech studies stylistic properties which appear in a context.

The subject-matter of stylistics can be outlined as the study of the nature,

functions and structure of stylistic devices, on the one hand, and, on the other,
the study of each style of language as classified, its aim, its structure, its
characteristic features and the effect it produces, as well as its interrelation with
other styles of language. 

People study stylistics to enrich the ways of thinking about language by shedding
light on the language system, as well as learning the ‘rules’ of language as
stylistics often explores texts where those rules are bent. Another reason is to
acquire the skills of adequate comprehension and accurate interpretation of
texts used in different spheres of human communication (mass media, editorials,
brief news, analytical articles, scientific prose, poetry, drama, etc.)

Definitions of style
The word style is derived from the Latin word 'stilus' which meant a short stick
sharp at one end and flat at the other used by the Romans for writing on wax
tablets. Now the word 'style' is used in so many senses that it has become a
breeding ground for ambiguity. The word is applied to the teaching of how to
write a composition. It is also used to reveal the correspondence between
thought and expression. It frequently denotes an individual manner of making use
of language. Sometimes it refers to more general, abstract notions thus inevitably
becoming vague and obscure, as, for example, "Style is the man himself" (Buffon),
"Style is depth" (Derbyshire); "Style is deviations" (Enkvist); "Style is choice", and
the like.

All these ideas directly or indirectly bear on issues in stylistics. Some of them
become very useful by revealing the springs which make our utterances emphatic,
effective and goal-directed.

"Style is a quality of language which communicates precisely emotions or

thoughts, or a system of emotions or thoughts, peculiar to the author."
(J.Middleton Murry)

"... a true idiosyncrasy of style is the result of an author's success in compelling

language to conform to his mode of experience." (J. Middleton Murry)

"Style is a contextually restricted linguistic variation." (Enkvist)

"Style is a selection of non-distinctive features of language." (L. Bloomfield)

"Style is simply synonymous with form or expression and hence a superfluous

term." (Benedetto Croce)

"Style is essentially a citational process, a body of formulae, a memory (almost in

the cybernetic sense of the word), a cultural and not an expressive inheritance."
(Roland Barthes)

Some linguists consider that the word 'style' and the subject of linguistic stylistics
is confined to the study of the effects of the message, for example, its impact on
the reader. Thus, Michael Riffaterre writes that "Stylistics will be a linguistics of
the effects of the message, of the output of the act of communication, of its
attention-compelling function"

The most frequent definition of style is one expressed by Seymour Chatman:

"Style is a product of individual choices and patterns of choices among linguistic
possibilities.”

The individual style of an author is frequently identified with the general, generic
term 'style'. But as has already been pointed out, style is a much broader notion.
The individual style of an author is only one of the applications of the general
term 'style'.

The analysis of an author's language seems to be the most important procedure

in estimating his individual style. This is obvious not only because language is the
only means available to convey the author's ideas to the reader in precisely the
way he intends, but also because writers unwittingly contribute greatly to
establishing the norms of the literary language of a given period. In order to
compel the language to serve his purpose, the writer draws on its potential
resources in a way different from what we see in ordinary speech.

What is literary language?

Literary language is one of the most important notions in stylistics and general
linguistics.

Confusion between the terms "literary language" and "language of literature" is

frequently to be met. Literary language is a historical category. It exists as a
variety of the national language.

The literary language is that elaborated form of the national language which
obeys definite morphological, phonetic, syntactical, lexical, phraseological and
stylistic norms recognized as standard and therefore acceptable in all kinds and
types of discourse. It allows modifications but within the framework of the system
of established norms. It casts out some of the forms of language which are
considered to be beyond the established norm. The norm of usage is established
by the language community at every given period in the development of the
language. It is ever changing and therefore not infrequently evasive. At every
period the norm is in a state of fluctuation and it requires a very sensitive and
efficient eye and ear to detect and specify these fluctuations. Sometimes we may
even say that two norms co-exist. But in this case we may be positive that one of
the co-existing forms of the language will give way to its rival and either vanish
from the language entirely or else remain on its outskirts.

There are two conflicting tendencies in the process of establishing the norm:

1) preservation of the already existing norm, sometimes with attempts to re-

establish old forms of the language

2) introduction of new norms not yet firmly established

The process of selecting and admitting lexical or morphological forms into the
literary language is not a conscious effort on the part of scholars. It is rather a
reluctant concession than a free and deliberate selection. When a linguistic item
circulating in the non-literary language gains admission into the sacred precincts
of the literary language, it is mostly due to the conscious choice of the man-of-
letters, who finds either an aesthetic value in the given unit, or some other merit
that will justify its recognition as a lawful member of the literary language.