Creation tool artistic images is the language. The author’s work on the language of the work includes the use of all possibilities of expressiveness, all layers of vocabulary and styles that exist in the language. Lyrics, prose, and drama have their own system of using linguistic means.
So, language characters is a means typification and individualization of heroes, since through language the author conveys their features life experience, culture, mindset, psychology. Individualization of the speech of characters is manifested in syntactic construction phrases, vocabulary, intonation, content of speech.
The individualization of the hero’s speech is associated with its typification, since these features of speech can also be considered as features of the speech of many people of a given social type.
As language resources that diversify the speech of characters and create a certain social type, you can consider synonyms, antonyms, homonyms; their use diversifies the speech of the characters, helps to avoid repetition and makes it more expressive.
Synonym- a word with the same meaning, but different in sound (arm and hand). In Russian there is a concept synonymous series, in the center of which there is always a neutral common word, and it is surrounded by words with additional, connotative meanings, which can be both positive and negative. All these words form a row or chain (peepers - eyes - eyes).
Antonym- a word with the opposite meaning (white - black). Antonyms in the Russian language can be grammatically formed in two ways: some are antonyms expressing diametrical opposition, therefore they are expressed in different words, for example, hot - cold. Others seem to contrast one half of the concept with the other, which is why they are expressed by adding negative particle"NOT": hot - not hot.
Homonym- a word that has the same sound or spelling, but different meaning. Among them there may be absolute homonyms (onion - onion); Homophones, that is, words that sound alike but have different spelling, for example, (mushroom - flu); Homographs, that is, words that have the same spelling but are different in pronunciation (zapil - zapil).
Quite often, special lexical resources of the language are used in works of art - outdated words(archaisms, historicisms), neologisms, dialectal and borrowed words, phraseological units.
Outdated words are divided into archaisms and historicisms. Archaisms are obsolete names of concepts and objects that exist in the Russian language and have a more modern synonym (cheeks - cheeks, forehead - forehead). They are most often used by authors who want to add solemnity to their speech and sublimity to the style of their work. Historicisms are the name of an object, phenomenon or concept that no longer exists, refers to past era and is used to recreate its color (sagittarius, caftan, yaryzhka).
Neologisms- new words and expressions that come into the language. These can be words meaning a new concept (cosmonaut, nanotechnology), or they can be the author's neologisms ("mustachioed nanny", "merged" - V.V. Mayakovsky). Sometimes the author's neologisms “take root” in the language and become commonly used (for example, the word “industry”, invented by N.M. Karamzin).
Dialect words- are used in a certain area and their use also characterizes the character or the author’s style in a work of art (for example, parubki, devchina, scroll - these are Little Russian or Ukrainian dialectisms that N.V. Gogol used in his works).
Loan words- words of foreign origin that came into the Russian language. Each century of Russian history is marked by borrowings from different languages - Turkic (boots, chest), German (sandwich, station, umbrella), French (cafe, pince-nez, muffler) English (revolution, constitution, parliament). Among the borrowed words, the so-called internationalisms, which sound the same in all languages - offer, franchise.
Phraseologisms- complex in composition stable combinations words, each of which has a special meaning (“the cat cried” - little, “carelessly” - lazily).
In addition to these linguistic means, fiction also uses special visual arts language, words in figurative meaning, or trails (singular, m.r. - trope!). Their existence is based on the phenomenon of polysemy or polysemy of a word. Thus, it can be said that trails are words used in figuratively, their use is based on the principle of internal convergence of various phenomena.
There are two simple tropes - epithet and comparison - and quite a few complex ones based on these two simple ones.
Epithet- represents artistic definition, highlighting certain aspects of the subject that seem important to the author; they are usually significant for a certain context in the depicted phenomenon. Epithets are expressed not only by adjectives (“My May is blue, June is blue...” - S.A. Yesenin), but also by other parts of speech, for example, nouns (“the mother of cheese is the earth”).
Epithets are divided into fine art And lyrical. Figurative epithets highlight essential aspects depicted without an evaluative authorial element, and the lyrical ones also convey the author’s attitude towards the depicted (“Wonderful Dnieper in calm weather...”, “I remember a wonderful moment...”).
There are also so-called permanent epithets that are folklore tradition(damask sword, red maiden).
Comparison- comparison of essential features in what is depicted using something familiar or similar (fast like a leopard, keen-sighted like an eagle). It creates a certain emotional coloring and expresses the author’s direct attitude to what is depicted.
Comparisons are divided into straight, that is, direct comparison affirmative form(“You are like a white dove between ordinary pigeons among others”) and negative. In a negative comparison, one object is separated from another using negation, thus the author explains one phenomenon through another. The technique of negative comparison is most often found in folklore (“It’s not the ice that’s cracking, It’s not the mosquito that’s squeaking, It’s the godfather who’s dragging the pike perch”).
Expanded comparison as a variation of this trope, it is a disclosure of a whole series of features, a characteristic of a whole group of phenomena. Sometimes it can form the basis of the entire work (the poem “Echo” by A.S. Pushkin or “The Poet” by M.Yu. Lermontov).
Complex paths are formed on the basis of simple ones and are based on the principle of internal convergence of various phenomena.
Metaphor- a trope based on the similarity of two phenomena, a hidden comparison (“the dawn flared up”). A metaphor speaks only of what it is being compared with, but does not say what is being compared (“A bee from a wax cell flies for a field tribute” - A.S. Pushkin).
Expanded metaphor- the trope that formed the basis of everything lyrical work("Arion" by A.S. Pushkin). Quite often in works fiction are used metaphorical epithets(“golden dreams”, “silk eyelashes”, “gray morning”, “foggy youth”).
Personification represents special kind metaphors, since it transfers the signs of a living being to natural phenomena, objects, concepts (“A golden cloud spent the night on the chest of a giant cliff...” - M.Yu. Lermontov, “The grass in the field will droop from pity, the trees in grief bowed to the ground ..." - "The Tale of Igor's Campaign").
Metonymy- bringing together objects that are different from each other and located in one or another external or intercom among themselves (that is, in fact, this is also a type of metaphor), which helps to highlight the most important, significant in the depicted.
The transfer of the properties of one object to another in metonymy can be carried out according to various criteria:
- - from content to content (eat a bowl of soup);
- - from the title of the work to the name of the author (“Belinsky and Gogol will be carried away from the market”);
- - from performer to instrument (“Lonely accordion wanders”);
- - from the action on the gun (“Their villages and fields for the violent raid he doomed to swords and fires” - A.S. Pushkin);
- - from thing to material (“It’s not like it’s on silver, it’s on gold” - A.S. Griboyedov);
- - from the hero to the place (“But our open bivouac was quiet” - M.Yu. Lermontov).
Synecdoche is a special type of metonymy - the transfer of meaning from one phenomenon to another based on the quantitative relationship between these phenomena.
Transfer can be carried out according to the following criteria:
- - With plural to the only thing (“And you could hear how the Frenchman rejoiced until dawn” - M.Yu. Lermontov);
- - With singular to the plural (“We all look at Napoleons” - A.S. Pushkin”);
- - With indefinite number to the specific (“Donkeys! Should I repeat this to you a hundred times!?” - A.S. Griboyedov);
- - from a specific concept to a generalized one (“Here the nobility is wild...” - A.S. Pushkin).
Hyperbola how the trope represents artistic exaggeration (" Rare bird will fly to the middle of the Dnieper" - N.V. Gogol).
Litotes- this is an artistic understatement ("Your Spitz, lovely Spitz, No more than a thimble..." - A.S. Griboyedov).
Periphrase- view artistic trope, in which the proper name or title is replaced by a descriptive expression (“Only you, hero of Poltava, erected an Immortal monument to yourself...” - A.S. Pushkin).
Oxymoron is a trope based on a combination of mutually exclusive concepts (“Living Corpse”, “sworn friend”).
Allegory (allegory)- a special trope that most often covers the entire work as a whole, and the allegorically depicted creatures mean others. This trope is the basis of fables, riddles, satirical works, since it highlights the main thing. essential in the character portrayed (“Crucian carp is a fatty fish and prone to idealism, and as for the ruffs, this fish is already touched by skepticism, and at the same time prickly” - M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin).
Irony- this is a hidden mockery in which external shape is contrasted with internal content (“Where, smart one, are you wandering from, you head?” - I.A. Krylov).
Grotesque is an ironic exaggeration with elements of fantasy (“The generals served in some kind of registry. They were born, raised and raised there. Consequently, they did not understand anything. They didn’t even know any words except “Let me express my greatest respect to you!” - M.E. Saltykov-Shchedrin).
Artistic language, being designed for perception and understanding against the background of a common, national language, differs from it in that the reality of the language of a work of art is the reality of an integral artistic world, as a result of which the linguistic and extra-linguistic (substantive) aspects work of art soldered much stronger than other functional styles. Therefore, the patterns of constructing artistic language are explained not by grammatical and syntactic rules, but by the rules of constructing meaning. Language with its direct meanings is, as it were, completely overturned into a theme and an idea. artistic design. Thus, the semantic duality of artistic language arises as a result of the collision of the objective meaning of words
with their subjective semantic orientation. This explains the appearance of additional meanings that “seem to shine through the direct meanings of words in poetic language” (Vinokur).
3. “Image of the author” as a substitute for the speech genre in a work of fiction
The speech genre in a prose work is personified. Unlike the communicative process in non-fictional functional styles, where real people act as communicants and the communicative process itself is single-layered, in a work of art the communicative process is two-layered: one communicative layer is formed by fictional communicants, they are part of the work of art. The other layer is formed by the real author-writer and the real reading public. Since the world depicted in the work is fictitious, made up, the communication system in the work is also fictitious, invented by the writer in order to make the content of the work reliable, alive, and create the illusion of real communication. Therefore, fictitious communicants in a work of art are not the real author and the real reader, but the creation of the writer - the “image of the author” and the “image of the reader.” In this sense, “speech genre,” being an abstract category, in a work of art acquires concreteness due to the invented communicants that specify the communicative process. In turn, the plot and images of the characters are already a product of the “image of the author-narrator”, and not the real author. In a prose work, someone must tell about the event. This “someone” is the substitute for the real writer in the work - “the image of the author-narrator.” When reading a work, the reader has an idea of both the characters who reveal themselves in direct speech, and the author-narrator who reveals himself in the author’s speech. Every utterance has its own author, there is no speech that is not spoken by anyone, it is always tied to the subject of speech, the speaker or the writer. Such a subject of speech in a work of fiction and prose is the “about-
times the author-narrator." The reader develops an idea of the narrator even when he is not named in the work and is not characterized in any way. Even in the most objective narration there is an "image of the author", because this objectivity is nothing more than a special construction, a special construction of the “image of the author-narrator”.
The “image of the author” is an image of a special type, different from other images of the work. It is the creation of a real writer and is connected dialectically with him, for the writer’s creativity is concrete. The Creator is always depicted in his creation. Therefore, there are objective reasons for mixing these concepts: the creator of the work is a real person, but the specificity of prose is such that someone must tell a novel, short story, or short story. Therefore, the writer’s personality recedes into the background, and his role in the work is transferred to the narrator, who recreates events and destinies.
“The image of the author-narrator” is organically connected with the correlative category of the reader. The reader is not the actual public that turned out to be the reading mass of a given writer, but something created by him - the “image of the reader.” The character of the reader, the nature of communication and forms of contact with him determine the structure of the artistic narrative.
The inner world and thinking of each person has its own stable social audience, in the atmosphere of which his internal arguments, internal motives, assessments, etc. are built. Speech is always focused on the interlocutor. It is a product of the relationship between the speaker and the listener. Any utterance is constructed between two socially organized people, and if there is no real interlocutor, then he is assumed to be a normal representative of the social group to which the speaker belongs.
From the outside- this is a certain speech organization of the work, behind which the “face” of the narrator shines through in all aspects of its functioning.
The typology of author-narrators is similar to the classification of speech genres in non-fiction styles. There are three main types of author-narrators in a prose work: 1) “autorial author-narrator” in the form “he” (Er-Erzähler); 2) “personal author-narrator” in the form of “I” (Ich-Erzähler), or in the form of a character in the work, but speaking on behalf of “I”; 3) “personalized author-narrator,” the so-called “narrator designated (by some name).” Within the boundaries of these types of author-narrators, there are various transitional forms.
1) Auditorial author-narrator in the form of "he" is outside the action of the work, outside the world of the content of the narrative, he stands above this world. How the reader sees him depends on the role he plays - a historian-chronicler, an objective publisher, an erudite writer or an ignorant graphomaniac. The author-narrator in the “he” form can simply narrate the story objectively, limiting himself to comments. Or maybe interfere with it. In the case when the author-narrator in the form of “he” seems to disappear from the narrative, hiding behind the heroes of the work, he nevertheless exists, but acts in the most objective roles: observer, reporter, director, etc. The narrative looks like this faceless cases. Most often these are silent scenes, detailed, filmed as if close-up. Language, as a rule, in such a narrative form is a specially processed literary language that has the structure of speech of the script genre.
Often the narrator in the form "he" is identified with a personal narrator, in which case the use of "he" serves to emphasize the fact that the narrator is outside the action, outside the depicted world. But his personality manifests itself in language, in the sense of his social or some other characteristic. The author in the form “he” can act in different roles.
2) Personal author-narrator in the form of "I" very diverse. From this diversity, two main forms of such a narrator should be distinguished - subjective and objective. For subjective The narrator's form is characterized by greater individualization, a greater degree of sensation of the presence of a living individual person. The personal subjective narrator creates the illusion of the absence of a narrator, the absence of narration, he shows, represents, depicts. Most often, such a narrator in the form of “I” acts either as an eyewitness or as a confidant of the hero, less often as a character. In this case, the reader’s position also changes: he either directly perceives the world, without the guiding and commentary help of the narrator, or he looks at everything through the eyes of the hero, taking part in the feelings and thoughts of the hero. Often this form is associated not with the narration of an event, but with the expression of a person’s state, mood, and experiences. The narrator in the form of "I" can combine two functions - the actor and the narrator. This form is widely used in autobiographical and confessional novels. In such narratives, all the accompanying social and characterological features of the narrator are presented most fully. In such cases, the “I” brings with it all sorts of introductory words, reservations, parentheses, because he speaks for the characters from himself openly, and here, so that the author’s knowledge hidden life the characters were believable, it is impossible not to stipulate that, they say, you, the author, seem to think, you are convinced, but, however, you are not sure, although you guess and, as I later found out, this was confirmed, etc., etc. in that spirit .
A personal narrator often creates a very detailed narrative, focusing on details. It can also approach either an auditorial or an objective narrative in the form of the self.
Objective form the narrator in the form of “I” is close to the auditorial one. Such a narrator, like an auditory one, is located outside or on the periphery of the event and is content with the role of a correspondent, observer, witness. Events described by an objective narrator in the form
“he” acquire illumination from the outside, and the events described by the objective narrator in the form of “I” - from the inside.
Writers often use in the same work different areas storytelling, both subjective and objective forms of the personal author-narrator.
Between the two forms of personal narrator - objective and subjective - are their various modifications. Thus, the narrator in the form of “I” exists in tales, letters, memoirs, autobiographies, and confessions.
As examples of these narrators, the following can be cited: in T. Mann's novel "Doctor Faustus" the narrator Serenus Zeitblom is inserted. In M. Frisch's novel "Stiller" in the first part the narration is told on behalf of the hero, in the second - on behalf of one of his friends. In Strittmater's novel Tinko, the story is narrated by the boy Tinko. In the same writer's novel "Ole Binkopp" the narrative is of a clearly subjective nature. Although the narrator speaks in the form of “he,” the complete impression is created that this is one of the characters in the novel, and sometimes he directly addresses the heroes of the novel, i.e. interferes in their lives, forgetting that he tells the reader everything.
Concerning structural organization“the image of the author-narrator”, then it is due to the diversity of this phenomenon and its scattered nature in the work. There are three types of organization of the “image of the author-narrator”: 1) the “image of the author-narrator” represents a single point of view throughout the entire work; 2) the “image of the author-narrator” in the work is one, but splits into different “faces” in the process of narration, and 3) the “image of the author-narrator” represents a plurality of narrators, where each image expresses its own point of view, its attitude towards what is depicted. The testimony of S. Maugham is interesting in this regard: “It is possible that in every
Among us there are several individuals mixed together that exclude each other, but the writer, the artist clearly senses this. For other people, due to their lifestyle, one side or the other outweighs, and all the others disappear or are pushed far into the subconscious.... a writer is not one person, but many. That is why he can create many, his talent is measured by the number of hypostases that he includes... The writer does not sympathize, he feels for others. He feels not sympathy, but what psychologists call empathy, it seems that Goethe was the first among writers to realize his diversity..."
Language, of course, is inherent not only literary creativity, it covers all aspects of the surrounding reality, so we will try to determine those specific features language, which make it a means of artistic reflection of reality.
The function of cognition and the function of communication are two main, closely related aspects of language. In progress historical development a word can change its original meaning, so much so that we begin to use some words in meanings that contradict them: for example, red ink (from the word black, to turn black) or a cut piece (to break off), etc. These examples suggest that the creation of a word is the cognition of a phenomenon, language reflects the work of human thought, different aspects life, historical phenomena. It is estimated that in modern usage about 90 thousand words are used. Each word has its own stylistic coloring(for example: neutral, colloquial, vernacular) and history, and, in addition, the word acquires additional meaning from the words surrounding it (context). An unsuccessful example in this sense was given by Admiral Shishkov: “Carrying fast horses, the knight suddenly fell from his chariot and left his face bloody.” The phrase is funny because words of different emotional connotations are combined.
The task of selecting certain speech means quite complex for a work. This selection is usually motivated figurative system underlying the work. Speech is one of the important characteristics of the characters and the author himself.
The language of fiction carries within itself a huge aesthetic principle, therefore the author of a work of fiction not only generalizes linguistic experience, but also to some extent determines speech norm, is the creator of language.
The language of a work of art. Fiction is a variety literary works, each of which represents an independent whole. A literary work that exists as a completed text, written in one language or another (Russian, French) is the result of the writer’s creativity. Usually the work has a title, lyric poems its functions are often performed by the first line. Centuries-old tradition external design The text emphasizes the special significance of the title of the work: during manuscript writing, and after the invention of printing. Various works: typological properties on the basis of which a work is classified as a certain literary family(epic, lyric, drama, etc.); genre(story, short story, comedy, tragedy, poem); aesthetic category or mode of art(sublime, romantic); rhythmic organization of speech(verse, prose); style dominance(life-likeness, conventionality, plot) ; literary trends(symbolism and acmeism).
Fine and expressive means of poetic language. The languages of spiritual culture are more monological: they serve primarily to identify content, whether emotional or mental, but embodied in a completely adequate way. Their essence is flexibility expressive means, albeit sometimes at the expense of their general availability: neither a priest, nor a poet, nor a scientist will ever sacrifice accuracy and adequacy of expression in the name of ease of perception. Language came to be seen as expression, art as communication; the result was the grammaticalization of art history. Later expressiveness, understood as special function language, was separated from his own poetic function, appearing in the reflectivity of the word, in its turning towards itself, or in focusing on the message for its own sake.
Firstly, speech form works may be prosaic or poetic - this is understandable and requires no comment. Secondly, it can be distinguished monologism or heteroglossia. Monologism presupposes a single speech style for all the characters in the work, which, as a rule, coincides with the speech style of the narrator. Heterogeneity is the development of different qualities of speech manners; in it, the speech world becomes the object of artistic depiction. Monologism as a stylistic principle is associated with an authoritarian point of view on the world, heteroglossia - with attention to various options for understanding reality, since the different qualities of speech manners reflect the different qualities of thinking about the world. In heteroglossia, it is advisable to distinguish two varieties: one is associated with the reproduction of the speech manners of different characters as mutually isolated, and the case when the speech manners of different characters and the narrator interact in a certain way, “penetrate” each other. The last type of heteroglossia in the works of M.M. Bakhtin received the name polyphony. Thirdly, and finally, the speech form of a work can be characterized nominality or rhetoric. Nominativity implies an emphasis primarily on accuracy artistic word using neutral vocabulary, simple syntactic structures, absence of tropes, etc. In nominativity, the object of the image itself is emphasized, in rhetoric - the word depicting the object. Colloquial speech(linguists call it “uncodified”) is associated with communication (conversations) of people primarily in their privacy. It is free from regulation and tends to change its forms depending on the situation. Conversation(conversation) how most important form human culture strengthened and declared itself already in antiquity. The verbal fabric of literary works, as can be seen, is deeply connected with orally and is actively stimulated by it. Artistic speech often also transforms into written forms outside artistic speech(numerous novels and stories of an epistolary nature, prose in the form of diaries and memoirs).
Artistic speech is the first element of literature. This is thinking in images. The material carrier of the imagery of literature is the word.
Verbal and speech structure - to attract attention.
Artistic language = poetic language= outer form.
Artistic speech is more correct!!!
A. B. Esin: “Fiction uses one of the existing national languages, rather than creating its own.”
Content
- Language of fiction …………………………………. 2
- Trails…………………………………………………………………………………3
Stylistic figures…………………………………………...3
- Literary principle.. ……………………………….....10
1. The language of fiction.
It is sometimes mistakenly called a literary language; some scholars consider it one of the functional styles of the literary language. However, in reality, artistic speech is characterized by the fact that all linguistic means can be used here, and not only units of functional varieties of literary language, but also elements of vernacular, social and professional jargon, local dialects. The writer subordinates the selection and use of these means to the aesthetic goals that he seeks to achieve by creating his work.
In a literary text, various means of linguistic expression are fused into a single, stylistically and aesthetically justified system, to which normative assessments attached to individual functional styles of the literary language are not applicable.
The way a literary text combines various language means What stylistic devices the writer uses, how he “translates” concepts into images, etc., is the subject of stylistics of literary speech. The principles and methods of this scientific discipline are reflected most clearly and consistently in the works of Academician V.V. Vinogradov, as well as in the works of other Soviet scientists - M.M. Bakhtin, V.M. Zhirmunsky, B.A. Larin, G.O. Vinokura et al.
Literary-linguistic norm and stylistic norm are concepts that are revealed in close connection with each other.
The norm of a language (language in general) is generally accepted and enshrined in given time in a given language community the use of linguistic means. The standard of literary language is usually associated with the criterion of exemplaryness. It is defined as “an exemplary application (use) of linguistic means”, as “a method of expression enshrined in the best examples of literature and preferred by the educated part of society. Literary-linguistic norm is a complex and heterogeneous formation, different from dialect norm not only by conscious codification, greater rigor and commitment, but also by functional and stylistic differentiation. Essentially, a literary norm is a system of norms that vary in relation to a particular functional style. A stylistic, or functional-style, norm is a manifestation of a literary and linguistic norm in the aspect functional style, i.e. its functional-style (or stylistic) variety. In other words, a single literary and linguistic norm breaks down into a general norm and private, functional and stylistic norms. The general norm is the same for the literary language as a whole, for all its functional and stylistic branches. It connects styles, substyles and varieties of styles into a single system of literary language.
1.1. Trails:
- epithet – figurative definition;
metaphor - the use of a word in a figurative sense to define an object or phenomenon that is similar to it in certain features;
comparison - comparison of two phenomena, objects;
hyperbole - exaggeration;
litotes – understatement;
periphrasis - replacing a one-word name with a descriptive expression;
allegory - allegory, allusion;
personification is the transfer of human properties to inanimate objects.
- anaphora - repetition individual words or turns at the beginning of a sentence;
epiphora - repetition of words or expressions at the end of a sentence;
parallelism - identical construction of sentences;
antithesis - a turn in which concepts are sharply opposed;
oxymoron – a comparison of mutually exclusive concepts;
non-union (asyndeton) and multi-union (polysyndeton);
rhetorical questions and appeals.
2. Literary and linguistic norm and stylistic norm.
The general norm, more precisely, general norms cover almost the entire morphology, with its system of declension and conjugation (after all, the overwhelming number case forms names and pronouns and personal forms verb has no variants at all), many models of word formation, models of phrases, many structural schemes of sentences, and finally, the main part vocabulary- stylistically neutral vocabulary.
Private norms primarily affect those linguistic means that have linguistic stylistic (except zero) or speech functional-style coloring. In morphology, these are some case forms for certain categories of nouns (for example, on vacation), a number of types of tense meanings of verbs (present historical, present actual, etc.) and figurative forms of the mood (do he do it...), forms of participles and gerunds, and some other forms; in word formation, some models that have an expressive coloring (such as goner, big-eyed, overnight) and a functional-style coloring (such as thermal conductivity, revolutionize, etc.); in syntax, a fairly significant number of sentence types, for example: definitely personal, some types of impersonal, sentences of a complex structure, periods, largely word order, types of intonation and logical stress; in the lexicon - stylistically colored and functionally colored means (terms, lexical clericalisms). In general, private, functional-style or stylistic norms, as R.R. Gelgardt rightly notes, “in contrast to the general linguistic norm, they have significantly less binding force and clear boundaries.” However, the norms of the functional style are heterogeneous: their core consists of fairly strict norms, while the peripheral norms are really optional and less clear. So, for example, the scientific style is absolutely contraindicated in the word order typical for the colloquial style, but certain colloquial elements of vocabulary are acceptable in it.
The norms of some styles, for example, scientific and colloquial, are clearly opposed to each other; norms of other styles, for example scientific and official business, may have significantly less differences.
Yes, for scientific style completeness of the syntactic structure is required, the boundaries of the sentence can be very extensive; the colloquial-everyday style, on the contrary, is characterized by incompleteness, moreover, not only at the syntactic, but also at other levels; The length of sentences is very limited. IN scientific text The order of words is subject to a logical principle, the options for word arrangement are limited. IN colloquial speech the order of words, reflecting its emotionally expressive nature, can have various options, including the location of the components of the phrase at a distance from each other. In scientific speech, words with an abstract meaning predominate, while in colloquial speech, words with a specific meaning predominate. The conditions for the functioning of these styles are also directly opposite: mediation of communication and careful preparation in the scientific, spontaneity of communication and lack of preparation in the colloquial. They also differ in the form of manifestation:
primary, and sometimes the only form Most scientific genres are written; the primary form of the colloquial style (except for the genre of everyday letters, which some scientists attribute to the colloquial style) is the oral form, and its written reflection in fiction is not mirrored.
The norms of the official business style, partly coinciding with the norms of the scientific style, especially at the level of syntax (see the corresponding chapters), differ very significantly from the latter. In the official business style there is a very strong tendency towards standardization of expression, covering not only individual linguistic means, but also entire genres of a given style (strictly established forms document). The official business style is categorically contraindicated for such elements of “revival” of speech, and especially imagery, as stylistically reduced vocabulary, comparisons, metaphors, personifications, which, within certain limits, find a place in certain varieties of scientific style.
The norms of journalistic style have wide variability due to the abundance of genres of this style, as well as its manifestation not only in written, but also in oral form (the speech of an agitator and propagandist, certain types of “conversation” on television, etc.), but in In general, they are determined by its inherent function of message and ideological influence, which generates a synthesis of informative and expressive linguistic means, and for the language of the newspaper, in view of its efficiency, and standardized means, i.e., a combination of “expression and standard.”
The norms of the language of fiction, as already noted, are so broad that they can go beyond the boundaries of the literary language in some of their aspects. The language of fiction is characterized by a synthesis of colloquial and book language means. However, colloquial speech is reflected in the language of fiction only in a prepared form, primarily because many of the structural qualities of colloquial speech associated with its orally, lack of preparation, immediacy of communication between speakers, cannot be in pure form transferred to written artistic text. Communication between the author and the reader is indirect and one-sided, devoid of feedback.
The norms of artistic speech acquire individual features in creative laboratory writer, reflecting his artistic views and linguistic tastes, as well as the genre, theme and idea of the work. If the style of an official document is, in principle, impersonal, standardized, and stereotyped, then the style of a work of art is, in principle, individual, original and unique. Language patterns and cliches found in certain literary works indicate their low artistic quality(unless, of course, these patterns and stamps are introduced by the author for artistic purposes).
The breadth of norms of artistic speech and their individual creative interpretation do not at all mean that they are vague or optional. Judging by how much work a writer puts into each phrase, into each word (and writers are endowed with both knowledge and a sense of language), we can conclude that the norms of artistic speech are no less, but more strict, than the norms of other functional styles. In principle, any or almost any word can be included in a literary text, but subject to one condition: it must meet both communicative and aesthetic purpose. Pushkin spoke about the need to observe “proportionality and conformity.” This explains the futility of attempts to approach the assessment of the language of a literary work only from the position of a general linguistic norm. Misunderstanding of this truth often leads, as one of the participants in a discussion about the language of fiction that took place in 1976 on the pages of Literaturnaya Gazeta (No. 17, 18, 20, 23, 27, 29, 33), to such a method of “criticism according to style,” which comes down to assessing the writer’s language on the basis of individual words and expressions taken from the artistic whole. At the same time, the dialectical complexity and inconsistency of the very norms of the language of fiction give rise to disputes on fundamental issues of verbal art. One of them is associated with the use of dialectisms. “In itself, a large concentration of extra-literary elements in the narrative cannot be considered a disadvantage,” writes F. P. Filin, “one must only take into account how motivated the use of these words is.” You also cannot turn the narrative “into a puzzle for readers.” There is also an acute question about the aesthetic motivation of deviations from general linguistic syntactic norms. Citing an example from the Italian cycle of poems by A. Voznesensky, where the legendary she-wolf is mentioned, which “feeds the child with dried-up nipples, like a comb with broken teeth,” F. I. Filin notes: “From the point of view of normative syntax, such a construction should be considered incorrect. However, this “incorrectness” is in a certain way an emotionally justified means; it creates the effect of colloquial speech with its syntactic inarticulation. In addition, such syntactic indivisibility is also associated with the inarticulation of the poetic image, with the desire to give as many associations as possible that arise around this image.”
In each functional style, therefore, there may be quite natural linguistic units - words, forms, constructions - that are unacceptable in other styles. However, the discrepancy between the norms of one style and the norms of another or with general norms does not yet give grounds to talk about the incorrectness or non-normativity of these units. As M. N. Kozhina rightly notes, “ignoring the specifics of a particular functional style, for example, a scientific one, leads to the fact that its inherent linguistic forms are sometimes declared non-literary, whereas they represent functional variants of the norm, for example, the plural of abstract nouns: minimums, maximums, value, activity, temperature, heat, density, influence, degree, concentration, latitude, etc.” In the same way, “the repetition of words, an undesirable phenomenon from the point of view of general stylistics,” is the norm of scientific style, where synonymous replacements are not always possible, since each synonym entails some additional semantic or stylistic connotation, and “since scientific speech must be as accurate and unambiguous as possible, sometimes it is better to sacrifice the aesthetics of speech than the accuracy of expression"
There are two approaches to studying the language of literary works: linguistic and literary. There has been scientific controversy between representatives of these philological disciplines for a long time. The outstanding philologist of the 20th century, Academician V.V. Vinogradov, laid the linguistic principle as the basis for the study of artistic speech. He connects the development of various stylistic features with the development of the national literary language and the development of the creative method as a meaningful category, giving priority literary language in its national significance. He was objected to by some literary scholars, and among them the most convincing was Professor G.N. Pospelov. The latter believed: the national literary language in the 30s - 40s years XIX century, for example, there was one, and the use of rich stylistic means was varied (Pushkin, Gogol, Dostoevsky), although all these writers were realists. Where does this difference come from? From the specifics of their content literary texts, from creative typification, from the characteristics of emotional-evaluative consciousness. The speech of a work of art is always specifically expressive and is ultimately determined precisely by the peculiarities of the content of the work. Literary language (as well as extra-literary dialects) is a living source of possible stylistic colors, from where each writer takes what he needs. There is no stylistic norm here. Therefore, V. Vinogradov is not entirely right when he says. What " Queen of Spades" and "The Captain's Daughter" are higher in realism than "Eugene Onegin", because they contain less "exoticism and folk-regional expressions." He is not entirely accurate, stating that the works of writers " natural school"The 40-50s (Dostoevsky, Pleshcheev, Palm, Nekrasov) created for the first time actually realistic styles, as they began to use harsh methods of social-speech, professional typification. Writers of the “natural school” reflected in their work the democratic trends of the time (and in language) , but they were not deeper realists than their predecessors. They were interested in the social lower classes and presented their speech characteristics, but due to their lesser talent, some of them did not achieve the typification that was characteristic of their predecessors.
2.1. Literary principle, suggesting the conditionality of one or another
etc.................
The peculiarities of the language of fiction are:
1) unity of communicative and aesthetic functions;
2) multi-style;
3) wide use figurative and expressive language means;
4) manifestation creative individuality author.
To this we add that the language of fiction has a great influence on the development of the literary language.
Not all decrees
These features are specific to the artistic style. As has already been said, only the aesthetic function is entirely related to it. As for other features, they are found to a greater or lesser extent in other styles. Thus, we find figurative and expressive means of language in many genres. journalistic style and in popular science literature. The individual style of the author is also found in scientific treatises, and in socio-political works. Literary language is not only the language of fiction, but also the language of science, periodicals, government agencies, schools, etc.; influences its development strong influence Speaking.
Being only a part of the general literary language, the language of fiction at the same time goes beyond its boundaries: to create “local color”, speech characteristics characters, and also as a means of expression in fiction are used dialect words, social environment characterize the words slang, professional, colloquial, etc. Archaisms are also used for stylistic purposes - words that have fallen out of the active language, replaced by modern synonyms. Their main purpose in fiction is to create the historical flavor of an era. They are also used for other purposes - they add solemnity and pathos to speech, serve as a means of creating irony, satire, parody, and color the statement in humorous tones. However, in these functions archaisms find application not only in fiction: they are also found in journalistic articles, newspaper feuilletons, in the epistolary genre, etc.
Noting that in fiction language appears in a special, aesthetic function, we mean the use of figurative language capabilities - sound organization speech, expressive and figurative means, expressive and stylistic coloring of the word. The figurativeness of a word is determined by its artistic motivation, purpose and place in the composition of a work of art, and compliance with its figurative content. The word in an artistic context is two-dimensional: being a nominative-communicative unit, it also serves as a means of creating artistic expression, creating an image.
A feature of the style of a work of art is the “image of the author” (“narrator”) that appears in it, not as a direct reflection of the writer’s personality, but as its peculiar reincarnation. Choice of words syntactic constructions, the intonation pattern of the phrase serves to create a speech “image of the author” (or “image of the narrator”), which determines the entire tone of the narrative and the originality of the style of the work of art.
Often the artistic style is contrasted with the scientific one. This opposition is based on Various types thinking – scientific (using concepts) and artistic (using images). Different shapes knowledge and reflection of reality are expressed in the use of various linguistic means.
To confirm this position, we can compare two descriptions of a thunderstorm - in scientific article and in a work of art
Conversational style
Conversational style is contrasted with bookish styles; he alone has the function of communication, he forms a system that has features on all “tiers” language structure: in phonetics (more precisely, in pronunciation and intonation), vocabulary, phraseology, word formation, morphology, syntax.
The term " conversational style"is understood in two ways. On the one hand, it is used to indicate the degree of literary speech and is included in the series: high (bookish) style - medium (neutral) style - reduced (colloquial) style. This division is convenient for describing vocabulary and is used in the form of corresponding marks in dictionaries (words of a neutral style are given without marks). On the other hand, the same term denotes one of the functional varieties literary language.
Conversational style is functional system, so isolated from the book style (it is sometimes called literary language) that it allowed L.V. Shcherbe make the following remark: “Literary language can be so different from colloquial language that sometimes we have to talk about two different languages" Literary language should not be literally opposed spoken language, i.e. take the latter beyond the limits of literary language. This refers to two varieties of literary language, each with its own system and its own norms. But in one case it is a codified (strictly systematized, ordered) literary language, and in the other it is uncodified (with more free system, a lesser degree of regulation), but also a literary language (beyond which lies what is partially included in literary speech, partly beyond its scope, the so-called vernacular). And in the future we will adhere to this understanding. And to distinguish between the available options within the literary language - lexical, morphological, syntactic - the terms “book” and “colloquial” will be used.
The conversational style is expressed both in writing(replicas of characters in plays, in certain genres of fiction and journalistic literature, entries in diaries, texts of letters on everyday topics), and verbally. This does not mean oral public speech(report, lecture, speech on radio or television, in court, at a meeting, etc.), which refers to a codified literary language, and unprepared dialogical speech in conditions of free communication of its participants. For last case The term "colloquial speech" is used.
Conversational speech is characterized special conditions functioning, which include:
1) lack of preliminary consideration of the utterance and the associated lack of preliminary selection of linguistic material;
2) spontaneity verbal communication between its participants;
3) ease speech act, associated with the lack of formality in the relationship between speakers and in the very nature of the utterance.
The context of the situation (the setting of verbal communication) and the use of extra-linguistic means (facial expressions, gestures, the reaction of the interlocutor) play a big role.
Purely linguistic features of colloquial speech include:
1) the use of extra-lexical means: intonation - phrasal and emphatic (emotionally expressive) stress, pauses, speech rate, rhythm, etc.;
2) widespread use of everyday vocabulary and phraseology, emotional and expressive vocabulary (including particles, interjections), various categories of introductory words;