Add me On Facebook

http://facebook.com/ahsanprofile

Thursday, February 16, 2012

check list of linguistic and stylistic of theories

The categories are placed under four general headings:lexical categories,grammatical categories,figures of speech and cohesion and context.Semantic categories are not listed separately since as suggested.It is easy to arrive at these through other categories;we shall, for example,use our lexical categories to find out how choice of words involves various types of meaning.Since the purpose of the list is heuristic,there is no harming in mixing categories in this way.It is also in the nature of things that categories will overlap,so that the same feature may well be noted under different headings.

Wednesday, February 15, 2012

Features of style

Style text and Frequency:-Features of Style
 The term "feature" has occured many times in this chapter.We defineit simply as the occurence in  a text of linguistic or stylistic category.Examples of linguistic categories are "nasal consonant","noun,"transitive verb","question","negative","future","colour term".Examples of stylistic categories are balanced sentence,"alliteration,"personification".Stylistic categories are more complex phenomena which are often difficult to define,but which are assumed to be describable in tems of linguistic categories,although they are not necessary part of the description of a language.Wee need to refer to them beacause they are a significant element of style,but we shall not in general distinguish them formally from linguistic categories......
                                           Linguistic categories are essentially contrastive and therefore their occurence entails the non-occurence of other categories:for example the occurence of a nasal consonant entails the non-occurence of a fricative consonant,a stop consonant,or a vowel.The contrastive nature of linuguistic categories is clear in cases where the category label contains two words:for example transitive verb obviously contrasts with other types of verb.In cases where there is only one term (eg noun) there is always an omitted generic term:a noun would be explicitly labelled a "noun word"; a question,"a question sentence",and so on.It is the part of the function of a linguistic theory, and of its linguistic description of the English language,to specify what linguistic categories there are and what are the contrastive relations between them.We shall not attempt a detailed account of linguistic categories in this book,but will use as far as possible those which are well enough known not to need explaination in terms of some linguistic theory.

Variation in style

But the "Pervasive" view of style also has to confront the fact that there may be a multiplicity of styles within the same work.Such Stylistic variation can follow various patterns.An evolutionary pattern in one.In this Portrait,Joyee offers a development of style corresponding to his hero's development from the dawning of linguistic consciousness,in childhood,to maturity.More ambitiously, in the Scylla and Charybdis episode of Ulysses,he offersa recapitulation,through parody,of English literary history.
                     Another kind of pattern is alternation.In Bleak House,the impersonal ironic voice of the author is interspersed with the more humanly involved voice of Esther.In Faulkner's "The sound and the fury",four "narrators" take it in turn to present their vision of events to the reader.A quantitative method can still be applied to these cases,if stylistically homogeneous sections can be separated out as different "texts" within the same work.This can lead to revealing internal comparisons:Halliday,for example,compares the Neanderthal style in "The Inheritors" with the homo sapiens style and a third,transitional style in the same novel.
                    It is less east to reconcile the "pervasive" approach with a more general and subtle type of stylistic shift which must be found,to some extent,in every novel.This is the adaptation of style,sometimes abrupt,sometimes gradual to the ongoing narrative focus,with its changes of tone,mood and subject.
                                                           The variation of style with tone is supremely exemplified in Dickens;and we may take,for illustration,four passages from the earlier part of Dombey and Son,in which style variation in intrinsic to the novel's satiric-epic picture of Victorian urban society,concentrating on the capitalist house of Dombey.The book begins,with the description of father and son at the latter's birth:the following paragraph is so formal in its rhetorical design,balancing each element of Mr Dombey's description against a similar element of the description of Paul,that we may set it out in tabular form (reading the columns from left to right)

[3] Dombey was about eight-and-forty years of age                              Son about eight-and-forty minutes

   Dombey was rather bald,rather red and though a handsome                Son was  very bald,and very red and though an undeniably
      well-made man, too stern and pompous in apperance                           fine infant,somewhat crushed and spotty in his
        to be prepossessing.                                                                        general effect as yet....


    On the brow of Dombey,time and his brother                                      While the countenance of Son was crossed with a thousand
      Care had set some marks,as on a tree that                                    little creases,which the same deceitful time would take delight
      was to come down in good time remorseless                                 in smoothing out and wearing away with the flat part of his
       twins they are for striding through their                                         scythe,as a preparation of the surface for his depper
       human forests, notching as they go....                                           operations.

This is a brief glimpse of one kind of language which recurs at intervals throughout the book,especially at symbolic and ceremonial points in the fortunes of the Dombey family:births,funerals and marriages.It is poised between comedy and moral seriousness,and the dominant note of irony is struck in the balancing of father and son,and in the reiterated unmodified nouns Dombey and Son- appropriate references to individuals whose lives are respectively dedicated and mortagaged to the gods of family pride and commerce.The tone is maintained by an armoury of traditional rhetorical devices:anaphora,parallelism (with antithesis),personification.At the same time, the formalism is broken up (particularly in the last and longest sentence) by elements which all ease transition to a lighter tone of comedy:for example,the bantering irony signalled by the parenthesis of though an undeniably fine infant (direct against a general human frailty,partiality of parents to their offspring,rather than against the more repellant from that partially takes in Mr Dombey);also, the fanciful extensions of the well-worn personifications of Time and Care again expressed through parenthetical elaboration of the syntax....
                     A different kind of style,and a different kind of rhetoric,is employed in passages where Dickness wants to move us with compassion:notably in Paul's death scene,where he can afford to use simple syntax and vocabulary (expressing the simple images of the child's mind) in the assurance that understatement will merely intensify the reader's sympathy..............

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

Style,Text and Frequency:-Primary and secondary norms

Style borrowing is thus a telling illustration of a principle on which Halliday insists:that prominence is not only departure from a norm but attainment of a norm.In one case attainment of a norm will mean style borrowing:the approximation to some external norm as a disguise or at least as a point of reference.In another case it will mean that the writer creates his own special kind of language:and it is in the sense that Halliday applies it to the Neanderthal language of the Inheritors.In this novel,he argues,the particular pattern of frequencies sets up its own expectancies,and the consequence is that we can generalize beyond the text,and judge whether a particular non-occuring sentence would be appropriate to its "language" or not.He shows,for instance,that "A branch curved downwards over the water could have easily occurred in the language of Lok,while he had very quickly broken off the lowest branches would be highly deviant.
                                                 The norm which is attained by stylistic consistency in a text might be called a secondary norm,since it is established by deviance from the primary norm which determine our more general expectations of language.Golding's novel is to some degree experimental in style,and when we read it,we sense there is something "odd"about Lok's language.This we do by reference to primary norms.But when we consider what might be deviant in terms of Lok's own dialect,we refer to the secondary norm.
                           

Style,Text and frequency:-Relative norms

It is time to return the question of "norm" on which the notion of deviance depends.Given that the ideal of a completely description of style in a myth,we can only aim at relatively reliable statements about what is frequent  or infrequent in a text....
                                Some kind of comparison outside the text or corpus is necessary,otherwise statements of frequency are vacuous.For example,discovering that x per cent of Gibbon's nouns are concrete,and only y per cent abstract is of little use by itself.This might be treated as evidence that Gibbon uses an abnormally large number of abstract nouns,but of course it cannot,for we might then discover that a preponderance of abstract noun is quite normal in the prose of Gibbon's contemporaries,and that Gibbon's language in this respect is not exceptional.We might even discover that he uses a lower number of abstract nouns than other writers of his time.Thus what at first appeared to be evidence in favor of one hypothesis  might turn out to be evidence against it.This example teaches us that a statement "x" is frequent in A is only meaningful if it acts as a shorthand for x is more frequent in A than in B'.
                                                             This object lesson leads to the use of a relative norm of comparison.Where an absolute norm for English cannot be relied on the next best thing is to compare the corpus whose style is under scrutiny with one or more comparable corpuses,thus establishing a relative norm.For example,Milic, in his study of Swift's prose style,confirms Swift's predilection for clause connectives by comparing his results for a sample of Swift with those for equivalent samples of Addison,Johnson and Macaulay.
             Percentage of initial connectives in 2000-sentences samples of Addison,Johnson,Macaulay and Swift.....
         
             Connective                Addison      Johnson         Macaulay           Swift
               C                             5.5              5.8                      7.4                 20.2
                 S                             7.1              6.2                  4.1               5.4
               SC                           3.3            1.4                    1.5                 8.3
          Total                           15.9             13.4                  13.0              33.9
Swift's habit of reinforcing connections between clauses sometimes reaches the extreme  of sequences such as and therefore if not with standing.........Milic sees this habit as having a role in Swift's persuasive rhetoric:as helping to create an impression of consummate logical clarity.This table is fairly convincing since there is a strong supposition that the markedly lower figures for other writers come closer to an absolute norm than those for Swift.The more comparable writers we study,the less likely it is that they are out of step with the norm of the language rather than Swift.The same technique may be used within the canon of a single author.For instance,Corbett,in support of the observation that Swift uses abnormally long sentences in A modest Proposal,cities a much lower sentence length  from a sample A tale to a Tub.The long sentences in Swift's ironic essay in support of cannibalism are explicable as a stylistic expression of the persona he adopts in order to intensify the impact of his outrageous proposal:in Corbett's words,we seem to be listening to a man who is so filled with his subject,so careful about qualifying his statements and computations,so infatuated with the sound of his own words,that he rambles on at inordinate length.The greater the range and size of the corpus which acts as a relative norm,the more valid the statement of relative frequency.But a small sample for comparison is better than nothing at all.......
                                        There are manifest dangers in the way a relative norm is chosen,but one it is accepted that relatively validity is all we can aim at these need to worry us unduly.It is obvious that a suitable norm of comparison.should be what Enkvist calls a contextually related norm.There would be little point in comparing Jane Austen's style with that of contemporary legal writs or twentieth-century parliamentary reports.What counts as the same category of writing,However can be defined to different degrees of narrowness.The books of Jane Austen could be compared with other prose writings of the period,(b) with other novels of the period,with other novels with similar subject matter,and so forth.The narrower the range of comparison,the surer we shall be that the stylistic features we are attributing to Jane Austen are peculiar to her style,rather than to the style of a larger category of writings which includes hers.....
                                       

style,text and frequency:-Deviance,prominence and literary relevance

The role of quantitative evidence can be understood more clearly if we look at the interrelation of the three concepts of DEVIANCE,PROMINENCE AND LITERARY RELEVANCE.Leaving aside for the moment the problem of determining a norm,we may define deviance as a purely statistical notion:as the difference between the normal frequency of a feature,and its frequency in the text or corpus.Prominence is the related psychological notion:Halliday defines it simply as the general name for the phenomenon of linguistic highlighting,whereby some linguistic features stands out in some way.We assume that prominence of various degrees and kinds provides the basis for a reader's subjective recognition of a style.Halliday distinguishes prominence from literary "relevance" which he calls value in game.Like Halliday,we shall associate literary relevance with the Prague School notion of Foregrounding,or artistically motivated deviation,as discussed.Foregrounding may be qualitative,ie deviation from the language code itself-a breach  of some rule or convention of English-or it may be quantitative,ie deviance from some expected frequency.The question stylistics must consideris:how are these three concepts of deviance,prominence and foregrounding interrelated?
                                                        first,let us consider the relation between prominence and deviance.Prominence must obviously be understood in relative terms:if features can register on a reader's mind in his recognition of style,the degree to which they are salient will vary,and the degree to which the reader responds in a given reading will also vary according to a number of factors,such as his attentiveness,sensitivity to stlye and previous reading experience.But this ability to react to what is "noticeable" in style must underlie our ability to recognize one passage as Dickensian,another as Jamesian and so on.We may go so far as to suggest that each reafer has a "stylistic competence",analogous to and conditional to the linguistic competence shared by all native speakers of a language.The analogy holds in so far as stylistic competence,like linguistic competence,is a capacity which we possess and exercise unconsciously and intuitively:only with special training can it be turned into explicit knowledge.But unlike Chomsky's ideal linguistic competence,stylistic competence is an ability which different people possese in different measure,so that although there may be a great deal in common between different English speakers responsiveness to stylo,allowance must be made for differences of degree and kind.........
                                                                               We presume a fairly direct relation between prominence(psychological saliently)and deviance (a function of textual frequency).It is resonable to suppose that a sense of what is usual or unusual or noticeable in language is built up from a life long experience of linguistic use,so that we are able to affirm with resonable confidence and without resort to a pocked calculator that Hemingway favors short sentences.It is in this sense that statistics may be an elaborate way of demonstrating the obvious.But it would be hazardous to assume that prominence and deviance are simply subjectice and objective aspects. of the same phenomenon.This is first because of the individual differences in stylistics competence already noted;secondly because our sense of style is essentially vague and indeterminate,not reducible to quantities;and thirdly because it is likely that certain deviances donot reach the threshold of response,even for the most experienced,alert and sensitive reader....
                                                              Both prominence and deviance have a negative,as well as a positive side:a feature which occurs more rarely than usual is just as much a part of the statistical pattern as one which occurs more often than usual;and it may also be a significant aspect of our sense of style.Recall that in Halliday's analysis of Lok's language,the rarity of certain categories was just an important as the high frequency of others:the most striking features of Lok's language were it's limitations.Like the relation between prominence and deviance,that between prominence and literary relevance or foregrounding is not a one-to-one match.Prominence,which is the basis for our sense of the particularity of a style,also provides the condition for recognition that a style is being used for a particular literary end:that it has a value in the game.But there is an additional  condition:we should be able to see a prominence feature of style as forming a significant relationship with other features of style,in an artistically coherent pattern of choice.According to Mukarovsky,it is the "consistency" and systematic character of foregrounding, not just the isolated occurence of this or that prominence feature,which is the distinguishing mark of literary language.Instances can be cited where this appears not to be the case:where prominence is due to other than literary considerations.Swift's dislike of monosyllables and Dryden's avoidance of final prepositions are cases of writer's preferences being guided by a general sense of linguistic propriety,of what is GOOD English.Lessers writers could provide many examples of idiosyncrasies of style which have no discernible literary function.In other cases,there is room for disagreement.It may be relevant feature of the later style of Henry James that he favors manner adverbs,and avoids adjectives.James himself seems to have felt an aesthetic reason for these propensities,for he is reported to have said:Adjectives are the sugar of literature and advervbs the salt.Whatever the force of this cryptic remark,it is up to us as readers to find a value for these preferences,or else to dismiss them as the outcome of prejudice or eccentricity.The dividing line between foregrounding and unmotivated prominence must be drawn in principle:where it is drawn in practice depends on a coherent literary interpretation of style.....
                                                           

Monday, February 13, 2012

Style.text and frequency:-The uses of arithemetic

In rejecting the fallacy of objectivity in stylistics we may have seemed to be laboring the obvious.But it is important to be aware of the limitations of the statistical concept of style before going on to a more realistic assessment of its value.If some studies of style are of doubtful value because of their emphasis on quantitative methods,the opposite tendency to rely entirely on what we may call stylistic intuition has,if anything been more prevalent.
                    Aesthetic terms used in the discussion of style (exuberant,florid,lucid,plain,vigorous etc) are not directly referable to any observable linguistic features of texts and one of the long term aims of stylistics must be to see how fat such descriptions can be justified in terms of description of a more linguistic kind.The more a critic wisher to substantiate what he says about style,the more he will need to point to the linguistic evidence of texts;and linguistic evidence,to be firm,must be couched in the term of numerical frequency.I may observe from close familiarity with her novel,that Jane Austen favors abstract noun of a particular kind.Perhaps no one will doubt the correctness of my observation.But what if another person has observed That Jane Austen has no such stylistic propensity?If challenged,I ought to be, and can be in position to support my claim with quantitative evidence.Observation here misleadingly refers to something it would be safer to call an intuition or a hunch that such-and-such is the case.I shall only be able to convince another person that such-and-such is the case if I take the trouble to present evidence which available to both my challenger and myself.
                                                             So let us see quantitative stylistics as serving a role in the circle of explanation.On the other hand it will provide confirmation for the hunches or insights we have about style.On the other,it may bring to light significant features of style which would otherwise have been overlooked,and so led to further insights;but only in a limited sense does it may provide an objective measurement of style.More over the role of quantification depends on how necessary it is to prove one's point.The escape from the intuition in the study of style leads inevitably in the direction of quantification.

Stylet,text and frequency:-The problem of "measuring style"

If style is regarded as a function of frequency,it seems reasonable to suppose that style can be measured.Some definitions of style have been based on this assumption.As example often quoted is that of Bernard Baloch,who defined the style of the text as the message carried by the frequency distributions and transitional probabilities of its linguistic features,especially as they differ from those of the same features in the language as a whole.Such definitions appeal to the empiricist,who would like to reduce subjectively perceived phenomenon to something objective,but they tend to alarm the student of literature.We hope to reassure the latter by showing that quantification is a less essential part of stylistics than this definition suggests....
                                                                            The principal underlying Baloch's formulation is simple enough.To find out what is distinctive about the style of the certain corpus or text we work out the frequencies of the features it contains and then measures these figures against equivalent figures which are normal for the language in question.The style is then to be measured in terms of deviations-either higher frequencies or lower frequencies-from the norm...........
                                     Many impressionistic statements about style would gain meaning for such a comparison.We often read statements or suggestions that writer X "favors" is fond of tend to use language feature Y: for example,that Hemingway tends to use short sentences,or that Johnson's favor abstract vocabulary.Such statements may be based on strong conviction and close observation,and may even felt to be self-evident,but they appear to have no empirical status-are merely we might say guesses-unless supported by frequency data.Under Baloch's type of analysis,the statement that Hemingway uses "short sentences amounts to a claim that the average length of the Hemingway sentence is shorter than the average length of an English sentence:something which can in principle be verified or falsified.....
                                                                           But even this simple illustration exposes the difficulties of the quantitative definition of style.How does one determine the average length of an English sentence?Does one use conservation,written prose,modern novels,etc as one's standard for determining the norm of the language as a whole?None of these individually could be regarded as representative.To arrive at the average length of an English sentence,one should ideally amass a complete corpus of the language at a given period.Leaving aside the problem of what time period to specify,we should have to ransack the libraries of the world to find a complete list of published works written during the period.This would still leave out manuscript compositions and spoken language.The operation would be totally impracticable.Even,it it were not,there would be other problems,such as whether a book read by millions would count equally,in the corpus,with a private letter;whether some publications would be weightier in determining the norm for the language,than others,In this situation the obvious resort is to sampling;but without some clearcut notation for statistical purposes,of what is meant by the "language as a whole",any sampling procedure is bound to involve subjective decisions.The norm of the language as a whole is not the objective reality that it seems to be in Baloch's definition ,and some less absolute standard of comparison has to be found...................
                                               

Sunday, February 12, 2012

Pluralism: Analysing style in terms of functions

An alternative to both monism and dualism which is in some ways enlightening than either is the approach which may fittingly be called stylistic Pluralism.According to the pluralist,language performs a number of different functions,and any piece of language is likely to be the result of choice made on different functional levels.Hence the pluralists is not content with the dualist's division between "expression " and "content":He wants to distinguish various strands of meaning according to the various functions...
                                                                       Than language can perform varied functions or commonplace of linguistic thought.The popular assumption that language simply serves to communicative roles in a communicate thoughts or ideas is too simplistic.Some kinds of language have a referential function;others have a directive or persuasive function;others have an emotive function or a social function.To this general appreciation of functional variety in language the pluralist adds the idea that language is intrinsically multi-functional,so that even the simplest utterance conveys more than one kind of meaning.For example",Is your father feeling better?".may be simultaneously referential ,directive and social.From this point of view,the dualist is wrong in assuming that there is some unitary conceptual content in every piece of language..
                                                                                     Of the many functional classifications of language that have been proposed,three had have some currency in literary studies.The oldest of the three is that of I.A.Richards,who in practical Criticism distinguishes four types of function and four kinds of meaning:sense,feeling,tone and intention.Jakobson's scheme is based on a more systematic theory of language and distinguishes six functions,each corresponding to one essential  aspect of the discourse situation.More recently still,Halliday's functional model of language acknowledges three major functions,which he calls "ideational",Interpersonal and "textual".................
                                                It can bee seen that pluralists tend to disagree on what the functions are,and even on their number.They also disagree on how functions are manifested in literary language.Richards holds that in poetry the function of feeling tends to dominate that of "sense"while Jakobson indentifies a special poetic function,which can be found in many uses of language,but which dominates over other function in poetry.
                                Although Halliday does not commit himself to a functional definition of literary language,he does recognize that different kinds of literary writing may foreground different functions.We shall take a part of his analysis of the language of William Golding's novel.The inheritors to illustrate the relation of pluralism to dualism and monism.
                                             The passage below illustrates the stylistics interest of Golding's novel:it deals with the prehistoric struggle of survival between homo sapiens and Neanderthal man,resulting in the latter's extinction.The major part of the book presents events through the limited Neanderthal outlook of Lok.The special lok-style which golding devises for this purpose differs considerably from the style he uses towards the end of the novel,when the point of view shifts to homo sapiens.It is important to notice that the contrast lies primarily in the function of language which Halliday calls ideational :that is,the way in which language conveys and organizes the cognitive realities of experience,roughly corresponding to what we have earlier called "sense:...........

Approaches and methods:-Comparing Dualism and Monism

We can see that justice of Lodge's claim that there is no discontinuity between the way language is used in prose and in poetry.But this conclusion should lead us to an accommodation between dualism and monism rather than rejection of one in favor of the other.The monist can be as easily floored by awkward questions as a dualist.We can challenge the monist by simply asking"How is it possible to translate a novel?Everyone seems to agree that it is easier to translate a novel than a poem:that one may appreciate that greatness of Dostoevsky in translation in a way that is not possible of Pushkin.It is addmittedly relatively easy for monist to show that even the best translation of prose work loses something of the original.But this is not sufficient:the monist must show how it is possible to translate a novel into the visual medium,as a film..
                                                          To put it most simply,a dualism is happier with prose and monism with poetry.But this oversimplifies a more complex situation.If the difference between prose and poetry is defined at its most banal level,by the absence or presence of verse form,then some types of poetry are more "prosaic"then others and some types of prose are more "poetic" than others.Here we may confront Lodge with his fellow critic-novelist,Anthony Burgess,who is joysprick: an introduction to the language of James Joyce,proposes a division of novelists into "class 1 and class 2".A class one novelists 1 who work language is a zero quality,transparent,unseductive,the overtones of connotation and ambiguity totally damped".The Class 2 novelists is one for whom "ambiguities",puns and centrifugal connotations are to be enjoyed rather than regretted,and whose books,made out of words as much as characters and incidents,lose a great deal when adapted to a visual medium.................

Saturday, February 11, 2012

Approaches and methods:-Stylistics

There is another reason why texts are natural focus for our study:within a text is possible to be more specific about how language serves a particular artistic function.Here we touch on the purpose of studying style,and hence on the nature of the stylistics......
                                       Stylistics,simply defined as the (linguistics)study of style,is rarely undertaken for its own sake,simply as an exercise in describing what use is made of language.We normally study style because we want to explain something,and in general ,literary stylistics has,implicitly or explicitly ,the goal of explaining the relation between language and artistic function.The motivating questions are not so much what as why and how from the linguist's angel,it is 'Why does the author here to choose to express himself in the particular way?From the critic's viewpoint,it is "How is such-and-such an aesthetic  effect achieved through language?We should scarcely find the style of Henry James worth the studying unless we assumed it could tell us something about James as a literary artist.Style being a relational concept,the aim of literary stylistics is to be relational in a more interesting sense than that already mentioned:to relate the critic's concern of aesthetic appreciation while the linguistic's concern of linguistic description.(We use the term "appreciation" to comprehend both critical evaluation and interpretation,although it is with interpretation that stylistics is more directly concerned)..
                                            A Question which is often asked in this connection is "At which end do we start,the aesthetic or the linguistics?".But this question assumes that the task of the stylistics is to provide a hard and fast technology of analysis,which is not the case.The image used by Spitzer of the "Philological circle",the circle of understanding,is more appropriate.Spitzer argued that the task of linguistics-literary explanation proceeded by the movement to and fro from llinguistic details to the literary center of a work or a writer's art.There is a cyclic motion whereby linguistic observation stimulates or modifies literary insight,and whereby literary insight in its turn stimulates further linguistic observation.This motion is something like the cycle of theory formulation and theory testing which underlies scientific method.There is no logical starting point,since we bring literary the text simultaneously two faculties.However imperfectly developed:our ability to respond to it as a literary work and our ability to observe its language.
                                                                 For completeness,it must be mentioned that stylistics can have other goal than this.Some of the more rigorous statistical studies of style have had the purpose of discovering the author of works of doubtful attribution.Such investigations have tended to concentrate on linguistic traits which may not necessarily be artistically relevant,such as range range of vocabulary,sentence length or frequency of certain conjunctions,on the principle that a writer's genuine "thumbprint" is more likely to be found in unobtrusive habits beyond conscious artistic control.....
                              The forewarns us of the issue of selection which all be taken up in chapter 2...In studying style,we have to select what aspects of language matter,and the principle of selection depends on the purpose we have in mind.The authorship "detective" will try to identify features of text which remain constant whatever the artistic or other motives of the writer,whereas in literary stylistics,features determined by artistic motivation are of primary interest.Not surprisingly,then literary stylistics and attributional stylistics have tended to move in different orbits..................

Approaches and methods:-Style and choice,The domain of style

The task of this chapter is to investigate the phenomenon of style in general terms,and so to prepare the ground for the analysis of its various aspects and manifestations in later chapters.We must take account of the various ways in which the word "style"has been used in the past:but we should be wary of becoming slaves to verbal definition.Definition are useful theory of the phenomena one wishes to study.They can broaden and narrow,illuminate or inhibit the understanding of verbal artistry.So We shall aim to work through definitions towards a richer appreciation of what literary style is and how it can best be analysed............
The Domain of style:-In it's most general interpretation,the word style has fairly uncontroversial meaning:it refers to the way in which language is used in a given context,by a given person,for a given purpose,and so on.To clarify this,we may adopt the Swiss Linguist Saussre's distinction between langue and parole langue being the code or system of rules common to speakers of a language,and parole being the particular uses of this system,or selections from this system,that speakers or writers make on this that occasion.One may say,for example,that certain English expressions belong to the official style of weather forecasting while other expressions belong to the style every day conversational remarks about the weather.Style,then pertains to parole:it is selection from a total linguistic repertoire that constitutes a style.This definition does not take us very far,however.In what follows,we shall narrow the scope of the term to something more adapted to the present purpose.
                             In purpose,writers on style have differed a great deal in their understanding of the subject and one source of disagreement has been the question "to what or whom do we attribute style?"In the broadest sense,style can be applied to both spoken and written,both literary and non-literary varieties of language;but by tradition,it is particularly associated with written literary texts,and this is the sense of the term which all concern us....
                                   Within the field of literary writing,there is again scope for varying definition and emphasis.Some times the term has been applied to the Linguistics habits of a particularly writer;at other time it has been applied to the way language is used in a particularly genre,period school of writing ,or some combination of these:'epistolary style"'early eighteenth-century style','euphistic style', early torian novels,etc...
All these uses of seem natural and servicable.It would be artificial to limit our understanding of style to one of them,let us say authorial style,and exclude the others.The only assumption one makes in using such expressions is that in corpus of writings referred to there are some characteristics uses of language,which are capable of abstraction as a style................