Stylistics Notes - H. G.

Widdowson

Chapter-1 Aims and perspectives

Stylistics is linguistics analysis of text. When we say text what do we mean by that?
Which text? Here text may include a poem and when we go for literature analysis
linguistically we treat literature as text. When we focus on literary criticism of
literature then we treat literature as discourse. But combination of both literature as
text and literature as discourse is what stylistic does. Many writer believes stylistics as
discipline but Widdowson believes that stylistics is neither a discipline nor the subject
but lies somewhere in between; it is like meditation between discipline and
subject. It related discipline with subject like language with linguistics and literature
with literary criticism. For instance he says; “I want to define discipline as set of
abilities; concepts; ways of thinking associated with a particular area of
which one inquires, geneticists, biochemist, linguist, and literary critics, for
example all follow certain principles of inquiry which characterizes different
discipline” meaning Genetic, Biochemistry, they all are different discipline what are
subjects then? Subject is that from which it is derived like subject is derived from
discipline; discipline provides material from which subjects are derived, because
discipline is a broader term. English language is subject; you’re reading different
subject in your school, English language, Math, Science; science includes chemistry,
biology, and physics but as you go on subject will go on move towards discipline. You
talk something general then you go to specify it. “By stylistics I mean the study
of literary discourse from a linguistics orientation and I shall take the view
that what distinguishes stylistics from literary criticism on the one hand and
linguistics on the other hand is that it is essentially a means of linking the
two and has (as yet at least) no autonomous domain of its own.” “Stylistics,
however involves both literary criticism and linguistics, as its morphological
make-up suggests; the ‘style’ component relating it to the former and the
‘istics’ component to the latter.”
Haliday defines stylistics as “the linguistics analysis of literary text” according to
him stylistician can comprehend literary text through a comprehension of their
language structure. Literary text is seen to consist of patterns and properties which
are part of language. Those patterns of language can be at level of:
a) Arrangement of graphic and phonic symbols
b) The lexico-grammatical patterns
c) The semantic or pragmatic patterns
The goal of stylistic is to show why and how the text means linguistically. Language
is subject and linguistics is its discipline same as literature is a subject and literary
criticism is its discipline. Discipline is studied to understand the subject. Stylistic is
neither a subject nor a discipline but it tells relation between them.
 Disciplines: linguistics literary criticism

Stylistics

(English) language (English) literature

For Example: a painting to a learner is nothing but use of colors but a critic may find
a hidden message behind that painting. Further when a non-verbal message is written
into a verbal message it further gives forms to understand this is possible through
literary criticism. Primarily critic concerned is with message of a literary piece which a
writer wants to convey. Linguist direct attention to how language is used in the piece
of literary text.
Chapter-2 LITERATURE AS TEXT

Literature has attracted the attention of linguist for two very opposite reasons.
One is that linguistic description of a literary text sometimes gives sense and
secondly it does not give sense sometimes.

Hadliday analyzes Yeat’s Poem “Leda and Swan” how two parts of the system of
English are exemplified one nominal group and other verbal group.

Leda and Swan

A sudden blow; the great wings beating still

Above the staggering girl, the thighs caressed

By the dark webs, her nape caught in his bill

He holds her helpless breast upon his breast

Haliday observes definite article “the” in English functions in number of ways and
can be distinguish in grammar accordingly. In general its function is to signal that
nominal group in which it appears constitutes specific reference. This reference is
of three kinds Cataphoric, Anaphoric and Homophoric.

1) Cataphoric: it may include group of words (adjectives) in form of modifiers

which come before a noun and qualifiers which come after a head word. For
example; “The White goddess in the temple” (white-modifier, in the temple-
qualifier). Article in this sentence specifies a goddess.

2) Anaphoric: it is a reference of already mentioned head noun or phrase in the

same paragraph. For example “The goddess was figure of mystery” it refers
to previous goddess in the poem.

3) Homophoric: when head words explain themselves and when they do not
need any reference they are called Homophoric references, for example ‘the sun’
‘the moon’ the president’ etc.

If a nominal group has either a modifier or a qualifier then the group fall into the
category of Cataphoric

reference, but if not having either anaphoric or Homophoric reference.

First criteria have to do with linguistics form and second with communicative
function, and relationship between them is considerably important. In Leda and
Swan there are 25 nominal groups and 10 contain definite article with modifier or
qualifier, this is a simple text analysis of the poem. Those 10 groups must be
counted as Cataphoric nominal group because of having modifier and qualifier but
they do not operate functional criteria of a Cataphoric reference. For example;
“the great wings” and “beating still” “the dark webs” in forms are Cataphoric
reference but wings are not identified as kind of

wings which are great and beating, and nor the webs that are dark, so respect
to their function they are either anaphoric or Homophoric reference.

So ‘the dark web’ and ‘the great wings’ and ‘staggering girl’ are identified as
anaphoric reference to the title of the poem. So these references ‘dark webs’
‘great wings’ as bodily parts are anaphoric reference to the Swan and
‘Staggering girl” identified +human +female to the Leda to the title of the poem
as anaphoric reference.

Sometimes Cataphoric reference function as deictic reference, when something

is pointed that is called deictic reference. In the poem there is possibility that
Yeats is pointing towards any picture, painting or to imagined vision in his mind.
This view can be supported when he uses “The thighs” instead of saying her or
his thighs. It is same like in guide books when there are no buildings in front but
their deictic references are used in the book. On other hand “Burning wall” can
be interpreted as Homophoric reference to the historical event of war of Troy. The
first use of definite article in the nominal group “The thighs caressed by the
dark webs” this follows the group “the staggering girl” which can relate to the
title, but since the latter group establishes the link with Leda identifying her as a
girl, but use of “the thighs” instead of her thigh shows the poet is referring to a
specific thigh in a picture or painting etc. Second observation concern the nominal
group “these terrified vague finger” here determiner is adjective “these
fingers” refers to which fingers? Which has no other semantic association to it;
so, it is painting or a picture. If it is assumed that; Yeats was looking at a
picture/painting of the Battle of Troy while composing this poem. But this is one
of the interpretations obtained according to the law of linguistics. No one is fully
sure that Yeats was looking at a picture and in order to get more information one
has to look at the deviations as well.

Deviations (Unconventional or odd and unacceptable)

Second reason of Linguistics interest in literary text is that of deviations that

cannot be evaluated by linguistics terms but they still carry a meaning. In literary
text we find such sentences which could not be generated by generative grammar
but are still interpretable. For example:

Me up at does

Out of the floor

Quietly stare

A poisoned mouse

Still who alive

Is asking what

Have I done that

You wouldn’t have

This poem is like an ungrammatical long sentences but it still gives a meaning that
mouse that is poisoned talking; since such a sentence is interpretable so grammar
should be of such a principle that can generate such kind of sentences. These
deviations in literature do not occur randomly but literary writers often patterns
to violate the grammatical rules but they still give sense in literary language.

Deviation may occur at any level of language description e.g. phonological,

graphological, syntactic, lexico-semantic, etc. At the graphological level, for
example, we may see capital letters where they are not supposed to be. At the
syntactic level, subject and verb may not agree in number. Or the normal
order of the clause elements may not be observed e.g. Adjunct may come
before the subject. At the lexico-semantic level, words that should not go
together may be deliberately brought together. e.g. “dangerous safety,” “open
secret.”

1) Category rules violation and sub category:Shakespeare has violet

category rule in his work such as “and I shall see – some Squeaking Cleapatra
boy my greatness” in this sentence the word ‘boy’ which is a concrete noun is
used as a ‘verb’ if we use it in grammar it would look like “she was boying her
hair” or “Mary boyed her doll” which is very odd and unacceptable but in
Shakespeare’s language it give sense. In this way writer violets category rule of
using noun as verb.

2) Sub-Category Rule Violation: Sub-category rule violation is done when

writer uses transitive verb as intransitive verb, a transitive verb always need an
object whereas an intransitive verb does not need any object; for instance ‘scaled’
in “I scaled along the house-side’ is used here as intransitive, like ‘climb’ but
actually it is transitive verb.

3) Selection and restriction rules violation: in literature large number of

Selection Restriction Rules Violation is involved mostly by giving feature of
animate to and non-animate things in description of language system. Most
common of all instance –animate nouns being given +animate and +human
features for example; in Ted Hughes’ poem “Wind” “seeing the window
tremble to come in” in this sentence oddity does not lie in the trembling of
window; which can tremble in storm etc. But problem lies the phrase “tremble to
come in” which requires a animate subject as ‘he tremble to come in’ here verb
re-categorization of verb and in result it gives it human quality. It is common to
give +human attribute to the non-human objects other example.

“The yellow fog that rubbing its muzzle” (Eliot) in this sentence the ‘fog’ is
given +animate because fog has no muzzle perhaps an animal can do that. For
instance “The Thistle saw the gardener” and “winds stampeding the fields”
here in these sentences thistle and winds are given +human quality.

4) Transformational Generative Grammar rule violation.

These are four kinds of

1) Addition: when a word is not required and the writer add it for certain effect
this is called addition.

for example: “and mas in myrth like ‘to’ a comedy” in the poem by
Spenser underlined ‘to’ is added by the writer though it is un-required. In other
example. Maria was coming at home, Maria has a god with her, Maria was coming
very slowly. Here Maria can be addition and can be removed.

2) Deletion: when a word is required but the writer deletes it for certain effects.
This is deletion.

For example: “the coat ‘which’ was expensive attracted my wife’s

attention” in this sentence ‘which’ can be deleted or for example: the coat /
the coat was expensive/ attracted my wife’s attention. ‘Tahir wants to
meet sidra’ can be written as ‘Tahir wants meet Sidra’

3) Substitution: when the writer instead of using ‘she’ word uses another word
this would be substitution. For example: ‘blank day, bald street’ rather
than empty street.
4) Reordering: when the writer changes the order of the words in a sentence for
instance ‘No loyal knight and true’ instead of ‘No loyal and true knight’.

“Sometimes a troop of damsels glad,” in this extract ordering is violated it can

be “sometimes a troop of glad damsels” according to generative grammar.

Deviations are used deliberately by the poets to beautify the literary work; literary
writer is allowed to make such deviance as contrast to a speaker. The result is
some degree to surprise the reader and to get reader’s attention.

It is hard to find out the degree of deviations in any rule. The problem of the
relationship between grammatical and interpretability is that even ungrammatical
sentences are interpretable.

Halliday believes that literary text (in which rules are violated) can be accounted
for in term of models of linguistic description while generative grammarians
disagree.
Chapter-03 Literature as Discourse
Discourse in form of lecture or conversation, group discussion between two or
more people represents speaker’s knowledge but not in literature. In literature
ungrammatical language makes sense and can be interpreted through its code
and context.

Code and Context:

Sometimes linguistic analysis may not give you the comprehensive meaning then
literary criticism may help it out to comprehend it. Deviations in literature are not
random but they are patterns. And deviations cannot be understood in isolation
but partly understood by linguistics (grammar rules etc.) and partly by context, in
which they appeared, so that means literature can only be understood as whole
We understand a language through its code which is grammatical structure;
unless we know the grammar we cannot understand a language. In the same
way every piece of literature has a different code of its language, through
some rules we derive a code out of literary text and we apply that code to analyze
whole literary piece.

Thorne’s proposals are applied particularly to e e Cumming’s poem “Anyone

lived in a pretty town” which he treats as corpus of a different language, is the
extreme deviance of which made it favourite text for linguistic analysis.

Anyone lived in a pretty how town

(with up so floating many bells down)

Spring summer autumn winter

He sang his didn’t he danced his did

If we analyze this poem, ‘anyone’ is a common noun in grammar but in the code
of poem it isused as proper noun so to understand these deviations we need to
understand literal characteristics of it as well.

“Anyone” is used as proper noun and auxiliaries “didn’t” and “did” are treated
as common noun in reference to “anyone” in the poem. It is because he talks
‘anyone’ in general who lives in that very town. These deviations may lead
us to the interpretation that writer’s past life is consisted of enjoyment.

In the code it does not happen all that time that all natural objects are
given +animate and +human features but sometimes they present as they
are, For example: “Winds stampeding the fields” “The blunt wind that
dented the balls of my eyes” (By Ted Hughes).

In this poem the poet wishes to express violent animacy of wind that house taken
on roots and windows come alive. We may say that winds in the poem
is animate but inanimate in general phenomena, and poet can’t simply ignore
literal meaning and bring an entire new meaning of the word. For example a word
may give different meaning in a context but in the same poem it retains its
original characteristics as well. E.g. in Browning’s poem “The Sullen wind
was soon awaken/ It tore the elm-tops down for spite” since the ‘Wind’ is
taken as +human as it awakens, but at the same time it retains its inanimate
characteristics as in next line “it tore elm-tops” use of ‘it’; which is a pronoun
used for both animate and inanimate.
It is clear now that making rules cannot give whole meaning; but they are still
English words and forms a part of language system, for instance, ‘anyone’ is a
common noun also an indefinite noun. Similarly ‘did’ is a common noun in the
code of the poem which is verb +past +activity.

It is clear now that literary text does not depend on reader’s knowledge or code
as they are common. In short neither standard grammar nor devised code can
work as whole for the meaning of a poem. It is suggested that an interpretation
of a literary work as piece of discourse involves correlating of linguistics item and
then context or background where it occurs.

Significance VS Values

Meaning in code is known as Significance and meaning in context is known

as Value. A word in a dictionary can give different meaning; but context
makes it clear that which meaning is being referred to, that is why readers do
not refer to dictionary after every word they read in the text. The value of a word
becomes significance with the passage of time; for example the word Band has
different meanings like group of people, group of musician, group of people
sharing same interest etc. it also has a value which can be understood by the
context. For example ‘Rocking band is coming to the concert” in this sentence we
come to know what value is referred. Like there are many words which got their
significance later e.g. earlier word freeze was used for salary but later became
famous as stopping something. Expression like Break up may be associated with
concrete words to the non-native speakers. The ability of language a user is to
give new values to words in a discourse. Grammarian sometimes says as if it is
only poets, children, and foreign learners who do not conform to the rules of
language code. The answer of questions, how a poet differ from others? Is that no
expression randomly occurs in ordinary discourse but they are pattern in
reoccurring sound (phonological), structure (syntactic aspect) and meaning
(semantic aspect)

1) Phonological Patterning

“On the bald streets breaks the black day” in this line phonological pattern
is used (alliteration) /b/ sound is repeated to make rhyme scheme which shows
desolation of the poet, through alliteration mood of the poet is conveyed.

Their stanzas of stifling scandals Cause the masses to curse

(Dasylva’s Songs of Odamolugbe)

This is an example of alliteration. The sound stanzas and scandals are the poet’s
deliberate selections. The sound effect created by such selection gives the reader
a deeper sense of understanding the enormity of corruption and insincerity in the
Nigerian society. It is the insincerity of the rulers that ‘cause’ the masses to ‘curse’.

2) Semantic Patterning

“The way a crow/stuck down on me/ the dust of snow/ from a hemlock

tree” through these lines death and desolation is presented for example Crow
represents black and black is dark and evil. Hemlock is associated with poisoned
tree, and dust of snow associated with Christian funeral ceremony “dust to dust”
so through these meanings successfully conveyed theme of death in the poem.

3) Syntactic patterning
for example in lines from Alexander Pope

See how the world its venterans rewards!

A youth of frolics, an old age of cards;

Fair to no purpose, artful to no end,

Young without lovers, old without a friend…

Through structure of the poem writer has conveyed his message for example
synonyms and antonyms are used, youth=old, love friend. Young=old,
fair=purpose, through these we can interpret that fairness is associate with youth
and the art is associated with old age. Look at this sentence: “He went home”.
The pattern of the sentence is SPA (S – Subject, P = Predicator, A – Adjunct). A
poet can violate the order of the above sentence in the form below:

“Home he went” (This has ASP pattern). The item “home” occurs in the initial
position of the sentence to foreground it. This is deviation for a specific effect.
CHAPTER-4 THE NATURE OF LITERARY
COMMUNICATION
Although the deviations are common in literature but these are not defining
features of literature. But literary language should be patterns into actual
language system. Widdowson suggests that effect of patterning is to create
acts of communication which are self-contained units, independent of
social context and expressive of reality other than that which is authorized by
conventions. In other words, literature should not be deviant as text it must of its
nature be deviant as discourse.

Literary communication takes place through literature or in other words

message conveyed through literature. Literature is deviant and may not follow
the rules of language and grammar the way non literary discourse
does. Literature is organized to form pattern and those pattern
communicate and that is purpose of literature. Literature cannot be
understood in isolation, in sentences or in phrases, but as whole, when
you go through a poem you know the poet want to say.

According to Widdowson literary communication is independent of social

context, because in ordinary communication‘s demand is social context so its
context dependent but unlike literary communication. We communicate and
literature communicates but difference is that our communication is
context dependent and literary is not.

To understand this we’ve to first understand the process of communication in

general. In communication we’ve sender who encodes message and there has to
be a receiver to decode the message. Similarly, there are addresser and
addressee, sender is addresser and receiver is addressee, who is being addressed,
or in the written message writer becomes sender and readers become receiver.
They are same in the common non-literary communication.

Grammatical sender and addresser is first person and receiver and addressee
second person. E.g. I/We, and You and a third person who is being talked about
she/he etc. But in literary communication it may not happen.

First Person in Literary communication: in literary communication sender and

addresser are different and addressee and receiver are different. For instance poet
writes a poem he is sending the message and the characters in the poem are the
addresser so there is different between sender and addresser.

E.g I’m the enemy you killed my friend : a dead person is addressing,
according to code of language the third person is addressing, in the context of
poem, being first person, so third person is used as first person.

I’m not yet born; o Hear me ; an un-born child speaks.

I come from haunts of coot and hern (reference to brook or stream is saying
I come from).

I bring fresh showers for the thirsting flower(cloud addressing).

These examples do not fulfill requirements eg. A dead person speaking which does
not happen in real world, a dead person can be talked of as third person, and
other requirement of addresser is that he should be human. In these
examples senders are poets Shelley, Owen, Tennyson and Mac Neice but the
addressers are dead person, unborn child, stream and clouds; which in
normal communication are being talked as third person.

First person pronoun in these extracts then is not the conventional one but is
somehow compounded with the third person to create a unique kind of reference.

Second person in literary discourse

Ye trees! Whose slender roots entine / Altars that piety neglects…

( Wordsworth) and Thou still unravish’d bride of quietness…/Thou foster-

child of silence and slow time. (Keats) With how sad steps, O moon, thou
climbst the skies…( Sidney).

In these extracts addressees are inanimate objects incapable of receiving

messages, therefore, third person entities. Poets commonly address non-
human objects, flower, clouds etc; but they know it is human reader who
receives their messages. It means addressee is different from receiver,
addressee is an object and receiver is human which is different from conventional
use of second person pronoun and third person is used as second person. If the
extracts are converted into common discourse then the value of the
discourse is altered. He is not yet born. It comes from haunts of coots and
hern. The still unravish’d bride of quietness.The poet is no longer ‘saying the
same thing’. We might express the difference for the moment by saying that the
immediacy of experience is lost and the poet is detached from complete
involvement.

Third person in literary discourse:

let us now consider how third person is used in literary communication, Fear took
hold of him. Gripping tightly to the lamp, he reeled, and looked round.

The water was carrying his feet away, he was dizzy.......In his soul, he
knew he would fall.(D.H Lawrence ‘The Rainbow’)

In this extract it is to be noticed that Lawrence is describing feelings of a

drowning man which is only felt by the person himself can feel. And this cannot
be predicted for third person except in reported speech.What goes in mind can be
only described by first person for instance In my soul, I know I would fall etc.
but of course neither first person nor third person suits the situation because man
is not presented as ghost speaking from his grave, but a drowning, which can’t
speak. In the extract we have effect of third person which takes value of both
first and third person.

In literary discourse we do not have sender sending message to receiver directly,

as in normal case. Instead we have a communication situation within a
communication and a message whose meaning is self-contained and not
dependent on who sends it and who receives it.

The literary message does not arise in the normal course of social activity as do
other messages, it arises from no previous situation and requires no
response, and it does not serve as a link between people or as a means
of furthering the business of ordinary social life. We might represent the
normal communication situation as follows:

I III II
Sender Receiver

Addresser Addressee

Literary communication:

I/III II/III

Sender Addresser Addressee/Receiver

Three objections might be raised against this characterization.

i) First, pronouns in English can refer to more than one person (I+III) “My wife
has a train to catch so we must leave at once” or “Your train leave at 10
so we must leave at once”. ‘We’ may also include speaker and hearer (I+II).
‘You’ II+II , I+III, I+II multiple references when someone is not directly
addressed.

Resolution:

Answer to this objection is that singular pronouns which in the code can only
have single reference but which in literary writing has what we might call
compound references. This might formulate I/III, II/II, III/I.

ii) Second, that the way Widdowson has compounded pronouns, as first person
pronoun in poetry refers to poet who is sender and addresser, does not follow
that all literature makes use of pronouns in same way.

Resolution:

This objection can be answered that in literary writing even if first and second
person pronouns do not refer to entities which cannot of their nature send
and receive messages, they do even so depend for their value on the ending of
the sender/addresser and receiver/addressee amalgams and on the addition of a
third person feature.

The literary writer is well aware that artistic convention within which he works
allows for this distinction between sender and addresser and so relieves him
from any social responsibility for what he says in the first person. This is how
literary writing differs from diaries and personal letters.

iii) Third, object that writer mostly does have social purpose of writing.

Resolution:

It can be answered that writer does not do so by addressing himself directly

to those who consciences he wishes to stir.

Most literature provokes no social action whatever. Shelly spoke of poets as ‘the
unknowledgeable legislator of the world’, but a legislator who is not
acknowledged is not a legislator; poets do not make laws, although they make
directly influence those that do. Literary discourse is independent of normal
interaction, has no links with any preceding discourse and anticipates no
following activity either verbal or otherwise.

Reformulation of the Principles: (Literature combines what is separate in

code)
A) UNCONVENTIONAL USE OF SENTENCE STRUCTURE

It is because a literary work is dissociated from other social interaction that the
writer is required to work the language into patters: patters are designed sell f-
contained and they are comparatively different from conventional language
code.

For instance in poem “Child On Top Of A Greenhouse”

“The billowing out the seat of my britches,

My Feet Crackling splinters of glass and dried putty,

The half-grown chrysanthemum starting up like accusers,

Up through the streaked glass flashing with sunlight,

A few white clouds all rushing eastward,

A line of elms plunging and tossing like horses;

And everyone pointing up and shouting.

The poem consists of a series of noun phrases or nominal groups. It deviance in

grammatical terms is shown by the fact that it is a sentence which lacks the
obligatory category of verb phrase. So this utterance is not an independent
sentence because first base rule of generative is ‘S NP + VP’ but VP is missing in
the above extract.

B) TIME/TENSE AND ASPECT SEPARATION

In ordinary communication tense and aspect are combined, without a tense aspect
does not give sense, full meaning; for instance: “he going home” is not clear
that he (is/was/will be) going home; but in literary discourse it is separated and
it is interpretable. It is to be noted that this kind of utterance (“The billowing
out the seat of my britches”) does not occur independent but in an ongoing
conversation. For instance,

A: ‘What do you feel’, B: ‘The wind billowing out the seat of my

britches. We can say that primary B’s utterance consisting of ‘I’ and verb ‘feel’
‘I feel the wind billowing’ but in the poem we’ve no linguistics background
knowledge so we cannot relate NP to the poem.

The problem is that we don’t know what to understand from the preceding text of
present or past, ‘the wind is billowing’ or ‘the wind was billowing’, poem has
no specific time reference. We’ve aspect (ing) but not tense(is/was), in
language code time and tense are interrelated one can’t have without
another; present continuous and present perfect tense, so including aspect as
feature of general category tense. But in this poem what is normally inseparable
becomes separated: we have aspect without tense.

The effect of isolating aspect here is to make a statement about an impression

of ongoing movement which has no attachment to time. Boy at the top of house,
apart from real time and aware only of a kind of timeless movement. Only
progressive form is used which runs as theme through linguistics patterning of the
poem – billowing, crackling, staring, flashing, rushing, plunging, tossing,
pointing, shouting.

The reality which the poem records, is that of subjective feeling. Individual
thoughts, feelings and perceptions, the private person, and this reality
cannot be described by society as whole, but through code of language it was
drawn to create a pattern of its own kind.

C) HUMAN FEATURES TO –HUMAN ENTITIES

Literary writing often follows strategy as; it combines what is kept separate
in the code and separate what is combined in the code. For instance, a
lexical item (wind) can combine the feature /-human which is part of signification
with the feature of /+human which context imposes upon it (winds stampeding
the fields), and the entity refers to both human and non-human at the same
time. And this is inseparable in the reality.

D) THE SEPARATION OF SENDER AND ADDRESSER, RECIEVER,

ADDRESSEE.

In ordinary conversation sender and addresser are same and receiver and
addressee are the same. In literary sender is poet and addresser is character in
the poem so they differ from each other (I am the enemy you killed my friend)
(Ewen).

In the poem the writer addresses objects in this way they become addressee but
reader of the poem are human being so they are the receiver so addressee and
receiver are different (Thou still unravish’d bride of quietness) (Keats).

E) PARADIGMATIC AND SYTANGMATIC RELATIONSHIP (Double

Articulation or Double structure)

Whereas syntagmatic analysis studies the 'surface structure' of a text, para

digmaticanalysis seeks to identify the various paradigms (or pre-existing sets of
signifiers) It is thought that phonological structure of language has no
independent function but serve only to construct units of grammar. But in poetry
patterns of sound do have a function other than that of constructing words: lexical
items enter directly into the meaning through value which they do not own.

The murmurous haunt of flies on summer eves (keats)

The presence of the murmuring noise of flies on evenings of summer.

The second does not have the same value as the first; there is not the same
degree of ‘convergence’ of double structure.

A linguistic unit, whether a ‘sound’ at the phonological level or a ‘word’ or ‘group

of words’ at the grammatical level, enters into two kinds of relation: it
is paradigmatically related to units which can occur in the same phonological
or grammatical context, and syntagmatically related to units which it actually
does occur with and which constitute this phonological or grammatical
context.

For instance: sound /p/ in pet, pat, pack are represented by –et, -at, and
–ack in contexts; it is in syntagmatic relationship with these sounds.
Sound /b/ in contexts to produce bet, bat, and back. /p/ and /b/, in the
contexts –et, -at, -ack- and in result are in paradigmatic relationship with
each other.

Paradigmatic describes substitution relationship for example in a sentence like

‘The plumber smiled’ NP (The Plumber) VP (smiled) each word can be
exchanged with other words like My Aunt Charlotte/ An old man without
changing syntagmatic relationship. Importance of paradigmatic relationship is
that it is one of criteria in the classification of words into various categories
such as noun, verb, pronoun, etc. items which can substitute for (smiled) will
be verbs. Similarly VP can be replaced Complained, Arrived etc, Mended the
pipes, installed. We can set up class of transitive verbs which all are verbs
having not following NP as part of their grammatical environment, for instance
some noun cannot occur with intransitive verbs like the plumber mended.

To make a correct sentence one selects an element from paradigmatic and

combines with another. In the NP and VP we’ve choices; between proper
noun and common noun, class of common nouns, animate and non-
animate; and within VP we’ve transitive and intransitive verbs belongs to
different paradigms.

Horizontal plane are syntagmatically related and those on the vertical place are
paradigmatically related. For instance: The Nurse Teacher disappeared objected
Arthur Harold Wilson shot ridiculed a man from the BBC The Archbishop of
Canterbury. Thus the nurse and teacher are equal but notnurse and Harold.
Again disappeared andobjected are equivalent but they are not equivalent
to shot and ridiculed but only to‘shot a man from the BBC’ or

‘ridiculed the Archbishop of Canterbury’ since it is these verb phrases and not
the verbs themselves which share the same column as the intransitive verb
phrases.

Substitution table gives us vivid understanding of formation of sentence

By selecting items from paradigmatic columns to combining them to form a new

sentence, selection and combination can be said basic principle of
linguistics organization. That is to say, a selection is made of a series of items
from the same column and equivalence is thereby transferred from vertical plane
of selection to the horizontal plane of combination.

For instance: Eliot’s Four Quartets might be arranged in to a substitution table;

Such tables yields a number of paradigmatic choices which can be made to form
a complete sentences for example: ‘words, strain under the burden, words
slip, words decay with imprecision, words will not stay still’. What

Eliot combines all choices so that the linguistic elements become equivalent in
combination as well as in selection and paradigmatic; and syntagmatic relations
were neutralized in this context.

A further example we can reduce some lines of Wordsworth which were previously
discussed to the contents of a substitution table:

If we move from left to right selecting from each column we can construct a whole
series of different sentences:

I have felt a presence that disturbs me with the joy of elevated thoughts.

I have felt sense sublime of something that impels all objects of all
thought.

I felt a spirit far more deeply inter fused.

I have felt a motion whose dwelling is the round ocean.

I have felt a spirit that disturbs me with the joy of elevated thoughts.
Wordsworth uses syntactic and semantic equivalences which create the effect
that poet trying to express the unspeakable; trying to capture a true
experience.

By organizing Wordsworth’s lines into a substitution table we can show how

paradigmatic and syntagmatic relations are combined to create a

literary discourse. By doing we point out linguistic feature of Wordsworth’s style;

it underlines our impression of its ‘sublimity’, its ‘grandeur’ and so on. The use
of table can be helpful in teaching literature.

Let’s now briefly review the converse: aspect of literary discourse which
depends on dividing what is normally compounded. The most obvious instance of
this, of course, is the separation of addresser from sender and addressee
from receiver. It is to be noticed that this separation is suggestive of the
independence of literary discourse from the normal processes of social interaction
and that it is because of this independence that internal patterns of language have
to be designed within the discourse to carry meanings. These patterns are
formed by reversing the normal principles of linguistic organization. Thus,
the dividing of what is combined leads to the combining of what is divided: the
one is consequence of other. The isolation of aspect from tense is the result
of removing the discourse from any contact with previous interaction, but
the consequence of this is that the occurrence of the continuous form of the verb
cannot itself be isolated in the context: it has to pattern in with others. The
first line of the poem: The wind billowing out the seat of my
britches…” make no sense on its own ( as it would if it were the reply of the
question or if it were linked with previous discourse In any other way). It only
makes sense in association with the other lines of the poem, as part of code
patterns prepares the way for the creation of patterns in context.

Separation of what is normally combined is, then, suggestive of the aloofness of

literary discourse.

Other examples are provided by such opening lines as; “No, no, go not to Lethe,
neither twist/ Wolf’s bane, tight-rooted, for its poisonous wine”
(keats) and “yes, I remember Adlestrop” (Edward Thomas). These lines
make o sense on their own. They only make sense in association with the rest
of the poem which they appear; being cut off from one link they have to form
others.

F) USE OF SPOKEN FORM IN LITERARY DISCOURSE:

“no, go not to Lethe, neither twist” (Keats) and“I remember Adlestrop”

(Edward Thomas).

These quotations sound like spoken replies, one catches the cadence of the
speaking voice; but at the same time lines are in medium ofwritten form.
Organization of first lines of poems suggests mode of communicating. The medium
used in literature is not like that of conventionally associated but it is more like of
spoken.

For example: the patterning of sound and stress upon which poetic
meanings so often depend are obviously intended to appeal to the ear,
and in this respect poetry has character of communication in the spoken
mode. The medium is writing, but the mode of communication is not definitely
spoken or written in the conventional sense but a blend of both. Literature also
has blend of both for instance; if we look at certain features of short stories,
appears to be mode of communicating which has no analogue in conventional uses
of language. It is very common to find literary works beginning with a third person
pronoun for which there is no previous reference. In normal circumstances, if one
uses ‘he’ or ‘she’ it is anaphoric or deictic reference and refers to human; however
this is not normally case in the literature for example: “she walks in beauty like
the night…(Byron), She was a phantom of delight… (Wordsworth). Here
‘she’ is not told about so here ‘she’ pronoun takes place of proper noun and it
never happens in normal discourse. For instance in Fiction its often found “He
came back into the kitchen. The man was still on the floor, lying where he
had hit him, and his face was bloody…” (Somerset Maugham :The
Unconquerred). And “ Soon they enter the Delta. The sensation was
familiar to him” (William Faulker: Delta Autumn) and “it was an eighty-cow
dairy and the troop of milkers, regular and supernumerary, were all at
work. (Hard; The withered Arm). Since there is no preceding discourse to
which these sentences can relate, the above used pronouns have no references
and reader takes it as it were, on trust. So the literary discourse and common
discourse differs; whereas ordinary discourse pronoun derive their value
retrospectively and in literary discourse pronoun take their
value prospectively from what follows. It frequently happens that in literary
discourse person pronouns are not anaphoric in function but operate as
Homophoric or deictic as in the case of the lines from Byron and Wordsworth or
Cataphoric in the case short story opening. Since “the man was still on the
floor” is a Cataphoric reference followed by article; in effect inclines us to
interpret these definite noun phrases deictically. The effect of use of phrase
like ‘The man’ without any given information; draw the reader into the imagined
situation and to provide an immediacy of reference by involving the reader as
participant in the situation itself. The purpose of throwing the reference forward,
of projecting the reader’s attention towards what is to come, is of course precisely
to make us read on.

Here are some other examples of the dual functioning of definite reference: “The
Picton boat was due to leave at half past eleven” (Katherin Mansfield: The
voyage) – “There was two white men in charge of the trading situation”
(H.G.Wells: In the Abyss). Occurrence of aspect without tense and use of
pronoun and definite noun phrases; which has no antecedent reference in the
context; reflects the independence of literary discourse. In conventional discourse
it is not generally necessary to provide details about the participants and the
setting in terms of time and place. If the discourse is spoken most of these details
appear within the actual situation. Whereas in literature sense of time and tense
and social context is removed; and sender is no longer identified with addresser
nor the receiver with the addressee. The fact about participants and about setting
in which they interact have to be included within the discourse itself. In
consequence, its mode of communicating is really neither spoken nor written in
any straightforward way but a combination of both. It is for this reason that prose
fiction is marked by frequent description of persons and settings: they represent
the necessary situational context within which the action, include the verbal
actions, of the participants can be understood; for instance: quote from Conrad’s
“An Outpost of Progress” “There was two white men in charge of the trading
station, Kayerts, the chief, was short and fat; Carlier, the assistant, was
tall, with a large head and a very broad trunk perched upon a long pair of
thin legs” and about place ít was dead hour of November afternoon. Under
the ceiling of level mud-coloured cloud, the latest office buildings of the
city stood out alarmingly like new tombstones among the mass of older
building” (V.S Pritchett: The Fly in the Ointmen).

The account of person and settings is not, however, a straightforward one (as,
indeed we might not expect it to be). As the situation is one which is removed
from the reality of normal social life there is no need to keep the different
situational factors distinct. Again see the combing principal at work. Thus, it is
common to find it instead of having persons, times and places described as
separate aspect of situation they are interrelated as features of a kind of composite
reality which we usually refer to as the ‘theme’. Consider again following example,
the opening of Lawrence’s story Fanny and Annie:

Flame-lurid his face as he turned among the throng of flame-lit and dark
faces upon the platform. In the light of the furnace she aught sight of his
drifting countenance, like a piece of floating fire. And the nostalgia, the
doom of homecoming, when through her veins like a drug. His eternal
face, flame-lit now. The pulse and darkness of red fire from the furnace
towers in the sky, lighting the desultory, industrial of crowd on the
wayside station, lit him and went out...Of course he did not see her.
Flame-lit and un seeding!....”

Scene here, the darkness and the red light from the furnace is inextricably
involved with the man’s appearance. This kind of description of person and setting
which is required in literary discourse has no exact analogue in other uses of
language. What literature communicates, then, is an individual awareness of a
reality other than that which is given general social sanction but nevertheless
related to it. The basic problem in the teaching of literature is to develop in the
student an awareness of the what/how of literary communication and this can be
only be done by relating it to, without translating it into, normal uses of language.
it is at this point that we can turn to pedagogic questions.
Chapter 5 Literature as Subject and discipline

Different between subject and discipline is that disciplines are derived from the
subject like you’ve studied literary criticism, linguistics or literature. So here he
discusses that how literature is to be taught as subject because we do teach in
literature as subject not only in Pakistan but in English countries.
But here is no proper framework as such for teaching English literature;
what he says that teachers more or less teach literature to the student as
the same way as they were taught. This stylistic that we’ve been discussing
and we’ve know how important this stylistic is, and within stylistic how
important the role of language is in understanding literature. Language
aspect, linguistics aspect and the linguistic analysis it guides to towards
the understanding of literature.

When you ignore the importance of language you just focus on critical aspect of
literature then you’re deriving the students of literature of very important thing in
order to understand literature language has to be given due
importance because as we see language is very important and there is no well
defined rules for teaching English literature that according to stylistics this is how
you teach the literature, take your example how you’re taught literature teacher
reading out the poem and teacher explaining the main points what a writer wants
to convey may be telling you about rhyme scheme at the most but guiding to you
towards message this is what poet is saying.

But what happens when you’re taught literature you’re taking the
message that teacher is delivering to you not the poem that is delivering,
a poem communicates as we’ve seen literature as communication; that
communication is delivered through the medium of teacher to the students. so
students are doing what they are not understanding literature themselves, not
trying to understand the message in the poem making use of language and all,
but they are the told what the message is and that is what they follow; if they
are supposed to explain that poem they will produce what the teacher has
told them this is what you student have been doing. Teacher tells you
summary the main idea and you reproduce it in exams.

Widdowson doesn’t believe in this approach he says that there should be

a proper system through which and proper techniques would be used so
that students are properly guided how to interpret literature; instead of
giving them readymade interpretation which they cram and reproduce and
teacher give them one or two interpretation and students apply them in all of
literature. He says that literature since we know language is patterns in
literature that gives the beauty to literature whether prose or poetry and
when you translate it or paraphrase it so that beauty is gone, “a summary
of scientific paper retains the character of scientific statement, but a
summary of novel or poem cannot to be literature.” students then are not
getting that beauty of literature and cannot appreciate that because they cannot
reach it. And this happens when language is not given importance for dealing with
literature. It is patterning of language and the point is what that patterning
is when you understand that you can understand literature. So language
cannot be separated but unfortunately this has been happening in
teaching of literature.
“it might For example if there is extract from Shakespeare’s play what teachers
normally do they take help of literature as discipline by looking for more work of
Shakespeare; so, looking for an of literature within the realm of literature. Their
teacher might have taught them in the same manner, so teaching literature
by taking help from literature that means ignoring the linguistics and
language. That is to say teaching literature as subject focusing on
literature as a discipline. Aim of teacher is to teach literature for the exams but
not for the sake of understanding of literature. Different disciplines are taught in
order to make students understand the subject. For instance TEFL students
are taught; how to teach and different techniques for teaching English
language but in literature teacher are not being given formal training for
the teaching of literature.

They are teacher of literature but they do not know the principles of teaching
literature; that his is how literature should be taught properly. So teacher teach
at their own the way they want. There is no general framework for teaching
literature; like TEFL has guidelines followed by all around the world for teaching
English. Aims and needed and procedure to achieve those aim. For this he quotes
like from F.R Leavis who is trying to define literature as a subject.

“the essential discipline of an English school in the literary critical; it is a

true discipline, only in an English school if anywhere will it be fostered,
and it is irreplaceable. It trains, in a way no other discipline can,
intelligence and sensibility together, cultivating sensitiveness and
precision of response and a delicate integrity of intelligence…”

So according to Leavis the aim of literature should be that it does all of these
things. And these are the things which no other discipline can do. This should be
aim of literature as a subject according to Leavis’ but Widdowson objects.

This chapter favors stylistic approach towards the study of literature. Widdowson
objects about definition of literature by F.R Leavis and he gives his own
suggestions about the concept of literature and how it should be taught.

F.R. Leavis’ definition of literature as a subject given which indicates what author
sees as the essential benefit deriving form study of literature and in particular
from a study of English literature:

“the essential discipline of an English school in the literary critical; it is a

true discipline, only in an English school if anywhere will it be fostered,
and it is irreplaceable. It trains, in a way no other discipline can,
intelligence and sensibility together, cultivating sensitiveness and
precision of response and a delicate integrity of intelligence…”

OBJECTIONS RAISED BY WIDDOWSON AGAINT THE DEFINITION OF F.R

LEAVIS

i) The aims of the discipline of literary criticism as given in the definition

are of extremely general and idealistic kind;

Leavis ascribes to literary study may not be achieved. But pedagogic aims have
to be more limited and realistic and within scope of reasonable attainment. His
ideas are more like philosophy of literary study as a discipline but it has no
indication how one might define pedagogy of literary study as a subject.
ii) There are a number of other discipline which might justifiably claim to
train people acquire precision of response, awareness of the significance
of tradition and so on.

There is no logic to believe Leavis’ claim. Scholars whose allegiance is to other

disciplines, like History, Sociology, and the different branches of the Physical
Sciences, could all make the sort of claim that Leavis makes.

iii) No mention is made of language whereas the benefits that Leavis

associates with literary studies can be realized if the student develops an
awareness of the way language is used in literary discourse for the
conveying unique messages.

Use of language has vital role in literary writing it differ from other disciplines for
instance a summary of scientific paper retains the quality of scientific
statement, but a summary of novel or poem cannot to be literature. Leavis’
ascribed effects can be achieved through other disciplines but those effects come
about through a heightened awareness of the way language can be used to explore
and express realities. Student hardly experience text by themselves so unless they
meet text they can’t understand the real sense of literature.

iv) Leavis’ remarks are made with British universities in mind or at least
with universities in English-speaking countries in mind and the remarks
were made over thirty years ago.

Literary studies have not generally been defined as a subject in such a way as to
develop such sensitivity, either in secondary school or in universities.

v) Rejecting the argument that English literature teaching fosters

desirable qualities of mind, one is left with two other possible reasons for
teaching it overseas:

1. Cultural reason: To acquaint students with ways of looking at the world which
characterize the cultures of the English-speaking people (English, Irish, Scotish,
Welsh) The treatment of literature as a cultural subject reduces literature to the
level of conventional statement about ordinary reality. It does not direct at the
specifically literary nature of literature. Literature, in such case, is only
treated as a source of factual information, such as, we might read
conventional forms of discourse like a historical document, philosophical
treaties, a sociological questionnaire.

2. Linguistics reason: To teach English literature as something written in English

language (figure of speech, metaphor, expression, the expression of language and
vocabulary.

WIDDOWSON’S SUGGESTION

In view of these difficulties, it would be better to define literary studies as a

linguistic subject and define the term “literature” as “an enquiry into the way
language is used to express a reality other than that expressed by
conventional means”. This of course, amounts to the study of literary works as
kinds of discourse. If one defines the subject in this way, the reason for teaching
overseas becomes immediately apparent. Pupils and students are engaged in
learning the English language; this involves in part of learning of the language
system the structures and vocabulary of English but it must involve also the
learning of how this system is used in the actual business of communication. This
being so, the manner in which the resources of the language system are used in
the fashioning of unique literary messages can be compared with other uses of
the language so as to make clear by contrast how the system is used in
conventional forms of communication. At the same time, of course, a

comparison with other kinds of discourse will reveal what it is what is unusual to
literary uses of English. So the study of literature is primarily a study of language
uses and such it is not a separate activity from language learning but an aspect
of same activity. Widdowson says that in most cases the individual can only
respond to literature as a result of guidance. One cannot just express to literary
writing but normally what critics and teachers. So often do is to tell students what
message are to be focused in the literary words. This discourages them to find
their own interpretation as the full input of work can only be recognized by the
individual direct experience of it. Widdowson says literature should be read
linguistically and literally. If we disregard we do not understand the real sense of
literature. Let is now consider some of the basic pedagogic principles that follow
from the kind of stylistic approach to literary study that has been outlined in this
book. Firstly, the study of literature is primarily a study of language use and
as such it is not a separate activity from language learning but an aspect of the
same activity. Secondly, it follows that the study of literature is an overtly
comparative one, since not otherwise can it be practiced as an aspect of
language learning in a more general sense. This principle can be put into
conventional use of language to demonstrate the difference in the way the
language system is realized for communicative purposes. The assumption is that
this comparative procedure will develop in the leaner two kinds of ability. The first
is the ability of recognize the manner in which the signification of linguistic
elements is modified by context and thereby to acquire a strategy for ascertaining
their value in actual use. Since it is common to find considerable divergence
between significance and value in literary discourse, must obviously in the
use of metaphor, literature can be used to demonstrate the kind of
reason progress which must operate in the understanding of any discourse.
The argument is that understanding literature and understanding other kinds of
discourse involve the same correlating procedure of matching code and context
meanings but in understanding literary discourse the procedure is made more
overt and self-conscious.