GENERAL 

PROBLEMS OF STYLE AND STYLISTICS.

 The notion of style.

 The notion of Stylistics
 Interaction of linguistic stylistics with other areas of linguistic knowledge
 Expressive means and stylistic devices

The notion 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. Stylistics is
concerned with the study of style in language. But what is style in language? How is it
produced? How can it be recognized and described? Is it a general feature of language?
The term style without specific reference to language is one which we use commonly in our
everyday conversation and writing that it seems unproblematic: it occurs so naturally and
frequently that we are inclined to take it for granted without enquiring just what we might
mean by it. Thus, we regularly use it with reference to the shape or design of something (the
elegant style of a house), and when talking about the way in which something is done or
presented (I don’t like his style of management). Similarly, when describing someone’s
manner of writing, speaking, or performing, we may say “She writes/performs in a
vigorous style”. We also talk about particular styles of architecture, painting, dress, and
furniture when describing the distinctive manner of an artist, a school, a period. We are going
to have a more technical discussion of the use of style in language. Now the word “style” is
used in so many senses that it has become a ground for ambiguity, and it is one of the thorniest
concepts to be dealt with in this course.
Due to this versatility of aspects quite a number of various definitions of style and stylistics,
in conformity with the certain aspect of investigation, were suggested:
1. According to John Middleton Murry, Style is a quality of language which communicates
precisely emotions and thoughts, or a system of emotions and thoughts peculiar to the author.
2. To Samuel Wesley it was “the dress of thought”,
3. to Jonathan Swift it was “proper words in proper places”, etc.

Some scholars view style as embellishment of language. Thus language and style are
regarded as separate bodies. Style is likened to the trimming on a dress. Moreover, style is
viewed as something that hinders the understanding. As soon as these definitions point only to
some peculiar aspects of their linguistic activity, without embracing the whole of the notion of
the subject of stylistics, they can’t be seen as complete and comprehensive. It would be to the
point to emphasize the definitions of style expressed by the American linguist Seymour
Chatman who said that “Style is a product of individual choices and patterns of choices among
linguistic possibilities” and by professor of Stylistics at the University of Amsterdam Peter
Verdonk who defines style in language as “distinctive linguistic expression”.Bennison
Gray denied the existence of style. His central question was Does style exist at all?
The majority of linguists who deal with the subject of style agree that it is connected with the
following main spheres of investigation:
1) the aesthetic function of language;
2) the expressive means and emotional colouring in language;
3) synonymous ways of rendering the same idea;
4) stylistic devices; 
5) functional styles of the standard language;
6) the interrelation between language and thought;
7) the individual style of an author.
 Functional style is the combination of vocabulary and structural patterns, expressive, means
typical of a particular area of communication and types of texts. The many senses of style can
be classified into two broad types: the evaluative, and the descriptive. Under the first heading,
style is thought of in a critical way: the features that make someone or something stand out
from an undistinguished background, and is an essential part of aesthetic approaches to
language, and is implicit in such areas as elocution, oratory, and literary criticism. The second
sense simply describes the set of distinctive characteristics that identify objects, persons,
periods, or places. In this sense we talk of “Shakespearian style”, “informal style”, “legal
style”, etc. Descriptive approaches are found more in scientific studies, such as the various
branches of linguistics. According to Werner Winter, a taxonomy of definitions of style might
be based on a number of principles: 1) the relations between the writer and the text when the
clues to style may be found in the personality of the writer and their environment;
2) the relations between the text and the reader where the reader’s reactions to textual stimuli
are pointed out;
3) the clues to style are looked for in descriptions of the text itself. Besides, Werner Winter
stated that all linguistic views of style tend to be based on one of three fundamentally different
views. First, style can be seen as a DEPARTURE from a set of patterns which are considered
as a norm. Secondly, style has been viewed as an ADDITION of certain stylistic traits to a
neutral expression. Thirdly, style has been viewed as CONNOTATION whereby each
linguistic feature acquires its stylistic value from the textual and situational environment.
The notion of Stylistics
According to professor Screbnev “Stylistics is a branch of general linguistics which studies
the nature, functions and structure of stylistic devices on the one hand, and on the other hand,
various styles of the language, their aims, structures, characteristic features and the effect they
produce.”Professor Peter Verdonk defines stylistics as “the analysis of distinctive expression in
language and the description of its purpose and effect.”Types of stylistics. Linguo-stylistics
(linguistic)is a science of functional styles and expressive potential of the language.
Communicative (decoding)stylistics describes expressive peculiarities of certain messages
(texts). Coding stylistics (literary)deals with individual styles of authors. Contrastive stylistics
investigates stylistic systems of two or more languages in comparison.
Interaction of linguistic stylistics with other areas of linguistic knowledge
Stylistics and Lexicology Lexicology studies the vocabulary of a given language; it focuses
on the semantic qualities of vocabulary (words, set phrases and word combinations), their
morphemic and structural patterns. Investigating the semantic nature of the vocabulary unit,
lexicology deals with two kinds of the lexical meaning: logical meaning (denotational) and
pragmatic (connotational) one.
Within the pragmatic meaning we may identify the following types:
1.emotionalmeaning (it shows the emotional state of the speaker, his frame of mind);
2.assessive or evaluative meaning (it renders the assessment of the speaker and evokes
assessive reactions of the recipient of the information);
3.expressive meaning (it emphasizes some attribute or feature of the object, phenomenon,
process, makes them more prominent);
4.stylisticmeaning (it identifies the vocabulary unit with a particular functional style and
area of communication).
In fact it is very difficult to draw a distinct line between the listed types of the pragmatic
meaning. Frequently this line is loose and blurred. As a rule emotively charged words and
combinations incorporate several types of the pragmatic meaning, e.g. lousy
1) emotional meaning –disgust, disapproval;
2) evaluative meaning –negative assessment;
 3) stylistic meaning –colloquial;
to rush
1) expressive meaning –it shows the intensity of the process, cf. –to run. Thus, the pragmatic
meaning is the shared realm of stylistics and lexicology, therefore the division of stylistics
dealing with emotive potentialities of the vocabulary unit is referred to as
lexicological stylistics.
Stylistics and Phonetics While phonetics studies and describes the articulation of speech
sounds, rhythm, intonation proper, “stylistics of the sound” or “phonostylistics” shows how
separate sounds, sound combinations, rhythm, intonation, etc. can serve as expressive means
and stylistic devices to convey the author’s idea. Among most common phonetic devices are
alliteration, assonance and onomatopoeia which evoke certain ideas, feelings, images or
emphasize some state or characteristic feature or quality. E.g., slip-slap of the slippers
(D.Cussak). Sounds were muted in the modern building: in low key, voices buzzed, papers
rustled, coinage jingled, calculators clicked. (A.Hailey) With the rushing of great rivers, With
their frequent repetition. And their wild reverberations. As of thunders in the
mountains. (H.Longfellow)(The sound [r] suggests a violent rush of water)Stylistics
and GrammarStylistics treats grammar phenomena as expressive means which add different
emotional and stylistic colouring to the utterance. “Stylistics of the sentence” or “syntactical
stylistics”, “Grammatical Stylistics” for example, examine the expressive values of syntactical
and morphological phenomena (e.g., individual grammatical forms, direct, indirect,
represented speech, repetition and parallel constructions, etc.).
Expressive means and stylistic devices
As stylistics treats language phenomena from the point of view of their expressive function, it
deals with some specific notions, which are indifferent to pure linguistic treatment of language
categories. These notions are expressive means and stylistic devices.
 Functional Styles of the English Language

 Professor I.R.Galperin’s classification of functional styles

 I.V.Arnold’s classification of functional styles.
 Professor Morokhovsky’s interpretation of functional styles.
 Professor Skrebnev’s theory of sublanguages.
 Peculiarities of David Cristal’s classification of functional styles.
Professor I.R.Galperin’s classification of functional styles
There are a great many classifications of language varieties that are
called sublanguages, substyles, registers and functional styles that use various criteria
for their definition and categorization. The term generally accepted by most scholars is
functional styles. Books by I.R.Galperin on English Stylistics are among most
acknowledged sources of stylistic research in this country. Professor Galperin
distinguishes 5 functional styles and suggests their subdivision into substyles in modern
English according to the following scheme:
1. The Belles-Lettres Style:a) poetry; b) emotive prose; c) the language of the drama.
2. Publicist Style:a) oratory and speeches; b) the essay; c) articles.
3. Newspaper Style:a) brief news items; b) headlines; c) advertisements
and announcements; d) the editorial
4. Scientific Prose Style.
5. The Style of Official documents:a) business documents; b) legal documents; c) the
language of diplomacy; d) military documents.
Prof. Galperin differs from many other scholars in his views on functional styles
because he includes in his classification only the written variety of the language. In his
opinion style is the result of creative activity of the writer who consciously and
deliberately selects language means that create style. Colloquial speech, according to
him, by its very nature will not lend itself to careful selection of linguistic features and
there is no stylistic intention expressed on the part of the speaker. At the sometime
his classification contains such varieties of publicist style as oratory and speeches. What
he actually means is probably not so much the spoken variety of the language but
spontaneous colloquial speech, a viewpoint which nevertheless seems to give ground
for debate. Scholars’ views vary on some other items of this classification. There is no
unanimity about the belles-lettres style. In fact Galperin’s position is not shared by the
majority. This notion comes under criticism because it seems rather artificial especially
in reference to modern prose. It is certainly true that many works of fiction may
contain emotionally colored passages of emotive writing that are marked by
special image-creating devices, such as tropes and figures of speech. These are typically
found in the author’s narrative, lyrical digressions, expositions, descriptions of nature or
reflections on the characters’ emotional or mental state. As a matter of fact, in modern
works of fiction we may encounter practically any functional speech type imaginable.
So most other classifications do not distinguish the language of fiction as a separate
style. The styles and their varieties distinguished by Y.M. Skrebnev included:
1. Literary or Bookish Style:a) publicist style; b) scientific (technological) style; c)
official documents.
2. free (“colloquial”) style:a) literary colloquial style; b) familiar colloquial style.
As can be seen from this classification, both poetry and imaginative prose have not
been included (as non-homogeneous objects) although the book is supplied with a
chapter on versification
I.V.Arnold’s classification of functional styles.
Next comes the well-known work by I. V. Arnold “Stylistics of Modern English”
(decoding stylistics). Speaking of functional styles, Arnold starts with the kind of
abstract notion termed ‘neutral style’. It has no distinctive features and its function is to
provide a standard background for the other styles. The other ‘real’ styles can be
broadly divided into two groups according to the scholar’s approach: different varieties
of colloquial styles and several types of literary bookish styles.
1. Colloquial Styles: a) literary colloquial; b) familiar colloquial; c) common
colloquial.
2. Literary Bookish Styles:a) scientific; b) official documents; c) publicist
(newspaper); d) oratorical; e) poetic.
This system presents an accurate description of the many social and extra linguistic
factors that influence the choice of specific language for a definite communicative
purpose. At the same time the inclusion of neutral style in this classification seems
rather odd since unlike the others it’s non-existent in individual use and should probably
be associated only with the structure of the language. One type of sublanguages
suggested by Arnold in her classification-publicist or newspaper—fell under the
criticism of Skrebnev who argues that the diversity of genres in newspapers is evident
to any layman: along with the «leader» (or editorial) the newspaper page gives a column
to political observers, some space is taken by sensation reports; newspapers are often
full of lengthy essays on economics, law, morals, art, etc. Much space is also given to
miscellaneous news items, local events; some papers publish sequences of stories or
novels; and most papers sell their pages to advertising firms. The enumeration of
newspaper genres could go on and on. Therefore Skrebnev maintains, we can hardly
speak of such functional styles at all. Of course Arnold is quite aware of the diversity of
newspaper writing.
However what she really means is the newspaper material specific of the newspaper
only: political news, police reports, press review editorials. In a word, newspaper style
should be spoken of only when materials that serve to inform the reader are meant.
Then we speak of distinctive style—forming features including a special choice of
words, abundance of international words, newspaper cliches and nonce words, etc. It
should be noted however that many scholars consider the language of the press as
a separate style and some researchers even single newspaper headlines as a functional
style.
 Professor Morokhovsky’s interpretation of functional styles.
Each style, according to Professor Morokhovsky has a combination of distinctive
features. Among themwe find oppositions like ‘artistic—non-artistic’, ‘presence of
personality—absence of it’, ‘formal—informal situation’, ‘equal—unequal social status’
(of the participants of communication), ‘written or oral form’. Morokhovsky
emphasizes that these five classes of what he calls “speech activity” are abstractions
rather than realities, they can seldom be observed in their pure forms: mixing styles
is the common practice. On the whole Morokhovsky’s concept is one of the few
that attempt to differentiate and arrange the taxonomy of cardinal linguistic notions.
According to Morokhovsky’s approach language as a system includes types of thinking
differentiating poetic and straightforward language, oral and written speech, and
ultimately, bookish and colloquial functional types of language. The next problem is
stylistics of ‘speech activity’ connected with social stereotypes of speech behaviour.
Morokhovsky defines this in the following way: “Stereotypes of speech behaviour or
functional styles of speech activity are norms for wide classes of texts or utterances, in
which general social roles are embodied—poet, journalist, manager, politician,
scholar, teacher, father, mother, etc”. The number of stereotypes (functional styles)
is not unlimited but great enough. For example, texts in official business style may be
administrative, juridical, military, commercial, diplomatic, etc. Still further
differentiation deals with a division of texts into genres. Thus military texts
(official style)comprise ‘commands, reports, regulations, manuals, instructions;
diplomatic documents include ‘notes, declarations, agreements, treaties’, etc.
Professor Skrebnev’s theory of sublanguages.
Prof. Skrebnev uses the term sublanguages in the meaning that is usually attributed to
functional styles. The major difference in his use of this term is that he considers
innumerable situational communicative products as sublanguages, including each
special idiolect. Each act of speech is a sublanguage. This makes notion of functional
style somewhat vague and difficult to define. The formal sublanguages in Skrebnev’s
opinion belong exclusively to the written variety of lingual intercourse. His rough
subdivision of formal styles includes: a) private correspondence with a stranger;
b) business correspondence between representatives of commercial or other
establishments;
c) diplomatic correspondence, international treaties;
d) legal documents (civil law—testaments, settlements; criminal law—verdicts,
sentences);e) personal documents (certificates, diplomas, etc.).
The informal colloquial sphere includes all types of colloquial language—literary,
non-literary, vulgar, ungrammatical, social dialects, the vernacular of the underworld,
etc. This cannot be inventoried because of its unlimited varieties.
Peculiarities of David Cristal’s classification of functional styles.
In his classification of functional styles of modern English that he calls language
varieties the famous British linguist D. Crystal suggests the following subdivision of
these styles: regional, social, occupational, restricted and individual. Regional varieties
of English reflect the geographical origin of the language used by the speaker:
Lancashire variety, Canadian English, Cockney, etc. Social variations testify to the
speaker’s family, education, social status background: upper class and non-upper class,
a political activist, a member of the proletariat, a Times reader, etc.
Occupational styles present quite a big group that includes the following types:
a) religious English;
b) scientific English;
c) legal English;
d) plain (official) English;
e)political English;
f) news media English further subdivided into: news reporting; journalistics;
broadcasting; sports commentary advertising.
Restricted English includes very tightly constrained uses of language when little or
no linguistic variation is permitted. In these cases special rules are created by man to be
consciously learned and us. These rules control everything that can be said. According
to D. Cristal restricted varieties appear both in domestic and occupational spheres and
include the following types:
a) knit write in books on knitting;
b) cook write in recipe books;
c) congratulatory messages;
d) newspaper announcements;
e) newspaper headlines;
f) sports casting scores;
g) air speak, the language of air traffic control;
h) emergency speak, the language for the emergency services;
i) e-mail variety, etc.
Tests to Seminar 1 Variant 1
1. Linguo-stylistics
a) deals with individual styles of authors; b) is a science of functional styles and
expressive potential of a language; c) investigates stylistic systems of two or more
languages in comparison
2. Evaluative meaning
a) renders the assessment of the speaker and evokes assessive reactions of the
recipient of information; b) shows the emotional state of the speaker, his frame of
mind; c) emphasizes some attribute or feature of the object
3. Alliteration is
a) repetition of the same vowel in several successive words; b) repetition of the same
consonant in several successive words; c) sound-imitating words
4. Expressive meaning
a) renders the assessment of the speaker and evokes assessive reactions of the
recipient of information; b) shows the emotional state of the speaker, his frame of
mind; c) emphasizes some attribute or feature of the object
5. “She soldiered on bravely.” The italicized word is a neologism formed by means of
a) inversion; b) conversion; c) compounding
Seminar 1 Variant 2
1. “She knew he had been a carabiniere, a member of the national police.” The
italicized word is a(n)
a) neologism; b) archaism; c) foreignism
2. The slang of one generation
a) can be standard English of the next; b) can’t be standard English of the next; c) is
always standard English of the next
3. Stylistic devices carry
a) as much information as expressive means; b) a smaller amount of information than
expressive means; c) a greater amount of information than expressive means
4. Neutral words are the main source of
a) polysemy and antonomy; b) alliteration and synonymy; c) polysemy and synonymy
5. General bookish words are chiefly used in
a) writing and colloquial language; b) in polished speech and colloquial language;
c) writing and polished speech