Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Jakobson

    Uploaded by

    Stefano José Ferreccio Bugueño
    9 views8 pages

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    9 views8 pages

    Jakobson

    Uploaded by

    Stefano José Ferreccio Bugueño

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 8
    Roman Jakobson 1896-1982 Roman Jakobson, the most eminent member of the Progue Circle, is one of this century's foremost linguists. Jakobson became a professor of Russian at the Higher Dramatie School in Moscow, his birthplace, in 1920. In 1929, he and two other members of the Prague school annoutced a substan tive break with the theories of Ferdinartd de Saussure, perhaps the most potent influence on their own studies until then. In 1933 Jakobson began his association with Masarykova (later Purkynd) University in Ceechoslovakia, becoming professor of Russian philology in 1934 and of Czech medieval literature in 1936. The unsettled politics of the ime precipitated his deparsure from the university: he sojourned briefly atthe universities of Copenhagen, Oslo, and Uppsala before finding his way to New York City in 1941. From 1943 to 1947 he taught at Columbia University, and then moved on to Harvard University, where he was a professor of Slavic languages and literature and general li guistics until 1967. Jakobson has written a wealth of speeck studies; he is the author, with Morris Halle and C. G. M, Fant, of Preliminaries to Speech Analysis (1952), and with Halle of Fundamentals of Language (1956). More recenily he has written on Shakespeare (1970), Yeats (1977), and the gram- ‘matical structure of children’s speech (1977). Excerpted here, “Linguistics and Poetics” was pub- lished in 1960. From Linguistics and Poetics J have been asked for summary remarks about poeties in is relation to linguistics. Poetics deals primarily with the question, What makes a verbal message a work of art? Because the main subject of poetics isthe differentia specifica of verbal art in relation to other arts and in relation to other kinds of verbal behavior, poeties is entitled to the Teading place in literary studies. Poetics deals with problems of verbal struc- ture, just as the analysis of painting is concerned with pictorial structure, Since linguistics is the slobal science of verbal structure, poetics may be regarded as an integral part of linguistics. “Arguments against such a claim must be thor oughly discussed. Itis evident that many devices studied by poetics are not confined to verbal art We can refer to the possibility of transposing Wuthering Heights into a motion picture, medieval legends into frescoes and miniatures, ot Lapris-midi d'un faune into music, ballet, and graphic art. However ludicrous the idea of the Hiad and Odyssey in comics may seem, certain ‘structural features of theie plot are preserved despite the disappearance of their verbal shape, ‘The question of whether W. B. Yeats was right in affirming Blake was “the one perfectly ft illus- trator for the Fnferno and the Purgatorio” is a proof that different arts are comparable," ‘The problems of the baroque or any other historical style transgress the frame of a single art, When handling the surrealistic metaphor, we could hardly pass by Max Emst’s pictures or Luis Busiuel’s films, The Andalusian Dog and The Sakobson is alluding to various adaptations of one are form 10 another. William Wlers 1939 Blm of the novel Wuthering Heights, by Baily Bronte (1847), to Claude Debussy tone potn, Afternoon of Faun (1854), based on the poem of the sume tle (1876) by Stephane Mallarné, 1930' Classics Isat comic book versions of Homer's ‘Md avd Oss, Willa Blake's 102 watercolor ilostr- ‘ions (1824-27) of Dante's Divine Comedy. STRUCTURALISN AND DECONSTRUCTION Golden Age? In short, many postic features belong not only to the science of language bat to the whole theory of signs, that is, to general semi- oties. This statement, however, is valid not only for verbal art but also forall varieties of language, since language shares many properties with cer- tain other systems of signs ot even with all of them (pan-semiotic features). Likewise, a second objection contains nothing that would be specific for literature: the question of relations between the word and the world con- ‘cers not oly verbal art but actually all kinds of discourse. Linguistics is likely to explore all pos- sible problems of relation between discourse and the “universe of discourse”: what of this universe. verbalized by a given discourse and how it is verbalized, The truth values, however, as far as they are— to say with the logictans — “extralin- ‘guistic entities,” obviously exceed the bounds of poetics and of linguistics in general, Sometimes we hear that poetics, in contradis- tinction to linguistics, is concemed with evalua- tion, This separation of the two fields from each, ther is based on a current but erroneous inter~ pretation of the contrast between the structure of poetry and other types of verbal structure: the latter are said to be opposed by their “casual,” designless nature to the “inoncasual,” purposeful character of poetic language. In point of fact, any verbal behavior is goal-directed, but the aims are different and the conformity of the means used 10 the effect aimed at is a problem that evermore. preoccupics inguirers into the diverse kinds of verbal communication. There is a close come- spondence, much closer than critics believe, between the question of linguistic phenomena ‘expanding in space and time and the spatial and temporal spread of literary models. Even such Gisconiinuous expansion as the resurrection of neglected or forgotten poets — for instance, the posthumous discovery and subsequent canoniz- tion of Emily. Dickinson (dl. 1886) and Gerard ule Bue’ fm collaboraons with Salvador Dali, Ue Chien Andalou (1929) wd L'Age d'or (1930) The late as the orcason of rot by rec fase a ihe theater at whieh ‘the fm was shoving ink wae thrown atthe gereen and cura [st platings by Joan Mico, Yves Tanguy, Man Ray, and Dali cle ware stashed. AKOBSON | Manley Hopkins (d, 1880), the tardy fame of Lantréamont (d, 1870) among surrealist poets, and the salient influence of the hitherto ignored Cyprian Norwid (@. 1883) on Polish modem poctry — finds a parallel in the history of stan- dard janguages that tend to revive outdated mod els, sometimes long forgotten, a5 was the case in literary Czech, which toward the beginning of the nineteenth century leaned toward sixteeath- century models. Unfortunately, the terminological confusion of “literary studies” with “criticism” tempts the stu- dont of literature to replace the description of the intrinsic values of a literary work with a subjec~ tive, censorious verdict, The label “literary critic” applied to an investigator of literature is as erro neous as “grammatical (or lexical) critic” would be applied to a linguist. Syntactic and morpho- logic research cannot be supplanted by a norma tive grammar,’ and likewise no manifesto, {oisting a crtic’s own tastes and opinions on cre ative literature, can serve as a substinite for an objective scholarly analysis of verbal art. This statement should not be mistaken for the quietist principle of laissez faire; any verbal culture involves programmatic, planning, normative endeavors. Yet why is a clear-cut discrimination made between pute and applied linguistics or between phonetics and orthoépy,* but not between literary studies and eriticism? Literary studies, with poetics as their focal point, consist like linguistics of two sets of prob- lems synchrony and diachrony. The synchronic, description envisages not only the literary pro- duction of any given stage bot also that pact of the literary tradition which for the stage in question hhas remained vital or has been revived, Thus, for instance, Shakespeare, on the one. hvand, ‘and Donne, Marvell, Keats, and Emily Dickinson, on the other, are experienced by the present English poetic world, whereas the works of James ‘Thomson and Longfellow, for the time being, do not belong to viable artistic values. The selection A nosmative gramme prescribes how language ought 12 be sed, as opposed to a dative grammar, which relates how language isin fet used. “ontotpy is the “comes” pronunciation of words, the phonologial equivalent of normative grammar. LINGUISTICS AND POBTICS 853 of classics and their reinterpretation by 2 novel ‘tend {sa substantial problem of synchronic liter- ary studies, Synchronic poetics, like synchronic linguistics, is not to be confused with statics’ ‘Any stage diseriminates between more conserva- tive and more innovative forms. Any contempo- rary stage is experienced in its temporal dynamics, and, on the other hand, the historical approach both in poetics and in linguistics is con- cemed not only with changes, but also with con- tinuous, enduring, static factors. A thoroughly comprehensive historical poetics or history of langeage isa supersiructure to be built ona series of successive synchronic descriptions, Insistence on keeping poetics apart from lin- suistics is warranted only when the field of lin- guisties appears to be illicitly restricted, for example, when the sentence is viewed by some linguists as the highest analyzable construction, for When the scope of linguistics is confined to grammar alone or uniguely to nonsemantie ques- tions of external form or tothe inventory of deno- tative devices with no reference to free variations. Voegelin has clearly pointed out the two most important and related problems that face struc- tural linguistics, namely, a revision of “the mono- lithic hypothesis about language” and a concen with “the interdependence of diverse structures ‘within one language.”® No doubt, for any speech community, for any speaker, there exists a unity of language, but this over-all code represents system of interconnected subcodes; every Inn- ghage encompasses several concurrent patterns, each characterized by different functions Obviously we must agrec with Sapir that, on the whole, “ jgns supreme in ian- ‘guage,”" bot this supremacy does not authorize linguistics to disregard the “secondary Factors.” ‘The emotive elements of specch, which, as Joos ig prone to believe, cannot be described “with finite number of absolute categories,” are classi- fied by him “as nonlinguistic elements of the real world.” Hence, “for us they remain vague, ‘the study of what doesnot change. $C. Voogeln, "Casual and Nopeasuel Uneranees within ‘Upied Survntres” in Syl in Language, ed by TA Sebeok (Cambridge, Mas. 1960), .57- "Supt, Language (NeW ork, 1921), p. 40. 854 protean, fluctuating phenomens,” he concludes, ‘we refuse t0 tolerate in our science."® Joos is indeed a brilliant expert in reduction experiments, and his emphatic demand for the “expulsion” of emotive elements “from linguistic science” is a radical experiment in reduction — reductio ad absurdan, Language must be investigated in all the vaci- ety of its fonctions. Before discussing the poetic function we must define its place among the other functions of Ianguage. An outline of these func- tions demands a concise survey of the constitu- tive factors in any speech event, in any act of verbal communication, The aponssssr sends MESSAGE to the ADDRESSEE. To be operative the -message requires a CONTEXT referred to (the “ref erent” in another, somewhat aunbiguous, nomen- lature), graspable by the addressee, and either verbal or capable of being verbalized; cope fully, ot at least partially, common to the adresse and addressee (or in other words, tothe encoder and decoder of the message); and, finally, a conract, a physical channel and psy- chological connection between the addresser and the addressee, enabling both of them to enter and stay in communication. All these factors inalien- ably involved in verbal communication may be schematized as follows: conTEXT MESSAGE ADDRESSER ADDRESSEE contac ‘cope Each ofthese six factors determines acifferent ‘function of language. Although we distinguish six basic aspects of language, we could, however, hardly find verbal messages that would fulfil only one function. The diversity lies not in a ‘monopoly of some one ofthese several functions but in a different hierarchical order of functions. ‘The verbal structure of a message depends pri- marily on the predominant funetion, But even though as set (Einstellung) toward the referent, an orientation toward the ConT=xtT — briefly, the so-called REPERENTIAL, “denolative’ M1, Joos, "Descrigion of Language Design." Jouel of she ent Sec of Aner, XXE 0950. 701-708 STRUCTURALISM AND DECONSTRUCTION function — is the leading task of numerous mes- sages, the accessory patticipation of the other functions in such messages must be taken into account by the observant linguist. ‘The so-called exorive or “expressive” func~ tion, focused on the ADDRESSER, aims a direct ‘expression of the speakec's attitude toward what he is speaking about. It tends to produce an impression of a certain emotion, whether true or feigned; therefore, the term "“emotive,” launched and advocated by Marty,!® has proved to be preferable to “emotional.” ‘Toe purely emotive stratum in language is presented by the interjec- tions. They differ from the means of referential Janguage both by tbeir sound pattern (peculiar sound sequences or even sounds elsewhere unusual) and by their syntactic role (they are not components bat equivalents of sentences). “Turd Twi! said McGinty:" the complete utterance of Conan, Doyle's character consists of two suction clicks."! The emotive fonction, laid bare in the interjections, flavors to some extent all our utter- ances, on their phonic, grammatical, and lexical level. f we analyze language from the standpoint of the information it carries, we ennnot restrict the notion of information to the cognitive aspect of language. A man, using expressive features to indicate his angry or ironie attitude, conveys ostensible information, and evidently this verbal behavior cannot be likened to such nonsemiotic, nutritive activities as “eating grapefruit” (despite Chatuian’s bold simile), The difference between {bis} and the emphatic prolongation of the vowel [bI:g] is a conventional, coded linguistic feature like the difference between the short and long such Czech pairs as [vi] “you" and [vi] ” but in the latter pair the differential information is phonemic and in the former emo- tive. As long as we are interested in phonemic invariants, the English ff and fisf appear to be ‘mere variants of one and the same phoneme, but if we are concerned with emotive units, the rela tion between the invariants and variants is MA, Marty, Unersuelungen air Grindlegung der alige- meinen’ Grams und Sprachphilasophie, Vol. 1 Gale, 1908) sound denoting disapproval, sltemately spall “ish, tsk" MeCingy appears in Doyle's novella The Valley of Fear (13) raxonson | INcwisties ano rosrics reversed: length and shortness are invariants implemented by variable phonemes. Saporta’s surmise that emotive difference is a nonlinguistic feature, “attributable to the delivery of the mes- sage and not to the message," arbitrarily reduces, the informational capacity of messages. ‘A former actor of Stanislevskij's Moscow ‘Theater! (old me how at his audition he. was asked by the famous director to make forty difer- tent messages from the phrase Segodnja vederom “This evening,” by diversifying its expressive tint. He made alist of some forty emotional situations, then emitted the given phrase in accordance with cach ofthese situations, which his audience had to recognize only from the changes in the sound shape of the same two words. For our research work in the description and analysis of contempo- rary Standard Russian (under the auspices of the Rockefeller Foundation) this actor was asked to repeat Stanislavski’s test. He wrote down some fifty situations framing the same elliptic sentence ‘and made of it fifty corresponding messages for a tape recording. Most of the messages were cor- rectly and circumstantially decoded by Moscovite listeners. May I add that all such emotive eves eas- ily undergo linguistic analysis. Orientation toward the ADDRESSEE, the ‘conATIVE function, finds its purest grammatical expression in the vocative and imperative, which syntactically, morphologically, and often even phonemically deviate from other nominal and verbal categories. The imperative sentences car-

    You might also like