Distinctive Linguistic Features of the Major Functional Styles of English

The theme of the presented annual project is Styles and Their Significance of Reading and Analyzing Texts. The actuality of the theme lies in the fact that without reading and analyzing different types of texts the reader cannot understand and penetrate into the world of the writer entirely, the reader cannot understand the style of the writer and its attitude toward the personages and the word. One of the main problems of the modern research in literature and stylistics is studying the nature and functions of separate types of styles of writing and texts with different terminology. The present annual project is dedicated to the investigation of reading and analyzing texts with different terminology, and namely the speeches of Barak Obama, and the short stories written by W. S. Maugham from the literary point of view and from the point of view of stylistics of such types of texts. The history of studying the style of the text goes back to ancient times, which took away an important place in literature. Problems of the style, literature and terminology through the prism of the terminology and stylistics, problem of formation of texts with different terminology and analysis of the texts with mixed terminology, functioning of the literary and non-literary texts, problems of implementation of style in the literature, were investigated by many researches: Galperin I. R., Weber J. J., Simpson P., Kozhina M. N., Enkvist. M., and others.

We will try to give a detailed explanation of what is an analysis of a literary and non-literary text, how it is presented in the stories written by William Somerset Maugham and in Barak Obama’s speeches, what their differences and similarities are. In spite of the fact that there are many researches in this problematic subject-matter, few of them are dedicated to the problem of difference and similarity of the literary and non-literary texts written by W. S. Maugham and Barak Obama’s speeches. The aspect of the two forms of writing of these two types of styles is not studied sufficiently. The problem how the style of Barak Obama’s speeches and the stories written by W. S. Maugham differs from each other has not been solved yet. In the work presented, the attention will be given first of all to the style of reading and analyzing texts as a whole, to the consideration of usage of such texts in Barak Obama’s speeches and W. S. Maugham short stories, and their differences. Despite the fact that there are many works dedicated to the problem of style, some important aspects have not been fully investigated. We are presenting the investigation of the style of reading and analyzing texts in W. S. Maugham and Barack Obama’s works. This defines the relevance of the work and its practical value.

This work considers different styles and their role in reading and analyzing texts and is formulated as a research on literature and stylistic nature of the texts, its types from the point of view of stylistics, literature, structural parameters and its significance in the texts of W. S. Maugham and Barak Obama. The hypothesis of the research is the searching of the types of reading and analyzing texts in the B. Obama’s speeches and W. S. Maugham short stories. The main goal of this study is to present and compare the types of each of the two styles of writing in the stories by W. S. Maugham and Barak Obama’s speeches on the literary, cultural, stylistic background,; which is the characteristics of such types of styles, demonstrating that reading and analyzing texts of each writer is closely linked to their style and writing abilities or manner of writing. For this the following objectives were advanced: – to select the theoretical sources for studying the subject matter; – to consider and examine what constitutes an analysis of text; – what types of writing styles exist;

– to study the works of Barak Obama and several stories by W. S. Maugham and to analyze their styles of writing; – to make the stylistic analysis of some works by W. S. Maugham and Barak Obama’s speeches. – to compare the styles in order to show their differences and similarities. For the fulfilling the objectives, we have studied the theoretical sources on style and literature, structural stylistic and inter-textuality manuals and dictionaries. We have followed the ideas of such researchers as Galperin I. R., Kozhina M. N., Enkvist. M., and others. We have also used the Internet sites with the researches where we have found modern approaches to the questions of the systems of government. With the help of these scholars and researches in the field of systems of government, we have attempted to examine the systems of government of the U.S.A. and Britain in order to find out the differences and the similarities of these two types of forms of the government. Our research is based on reading and analyzing the two types of styles of writing, namely Barak Obama’s speeches and some short stories by W. S. Maugham in order to analyze each style apart. For the achievement of our objectives, we have used the following methods of the scientific-theoretical level, such as: • indicative;

• comparative;
• the method of investigation;
Our annual project consists of Contents, Introduction, Chapter One, Chapter Two, Conclusions, Bibliography, Appendix 1, and Appendix 2 . Introduction presents the theme of the annual project, its main goal, the objectives, the hypothesis; the fields of style in the books, manuals and references by some researchers and authors; the structure of the research and its practical relevance and value. Chapter One is a theoretical study of our research and deals with the main theoretical notes of investigated problems in the field of styles and their usage. Chapter Two is a practical part of our research and deals with the analysis of two types of writing styles of Barak Obama and W. S. Maugham. Conclusions summarize all the practical experience in the process of investigation. Bibliography gives an overview of scientific literature used in the paper. Appendix 1 contains US President Barack Obama’s Inauguration speech. Appendix 2 presents Barack Obama’s Victory Speech . US President Elect Speech. November 4th 2008 We should mention that this research work represents much value for those willing to take up their future research in the field of literature and stylistics studying and especially the practical value in the better understanding of the way the two types of writing styles are used.

Chapter One. Theory of Style and Text Significance

Style in literature is a term which may be defined, as language regarded, from the point of view of the characteristics which it reveals; similarly, by analogy, in other arts, a mode or method of working characterized by distinctive features.

1. Notion of Style

The word “style” is derived from the instrument stilus (wrongly spelled stylus), of metal, wood or ivory, by means of which, in classic times, letters and words were imprinted upon waxen tablets [49, p. 67]. By the transition of thought known as metonymy the word has been transferred from the object which makes the impression to the sentences which are impressed by it, and a mechanical observation has become an intellectual conception. To “turn the stylus” was to correct what had been written by the sharp end of the tool, by a judicious application of the blunt end, and this responds to that discipline and self-criticism upon which literary excellence depends. The energy of a deliberate writer would make a firm and full impression when he wielded the stylus [50, p. 10]. A scribe of rapid and fugitive habit would press more irregularly and produce a less consistent text. The varieties of writing induced by these differences of temperament would reveal the nature of the writer, yet they would be attributed, and with justice, to the implement which immediately produced them. Thus it would be natural for any one who examined several tablets of wax to say, “The writers of these inscriptions are revealed by their stylus” [51, p. 76]; in other words, the style or impression of the implement is the medium by which the temperament is transferred to the written speech.

If we analyze deeper, the famous phrase of Buffon becomes at once not merely intelligible but luminous – “le style est l’homme même” [1, p. 12]. This axiom is constantly misquoted (“le style c’est l’homme”), and not infrequently miscomprehended. It is usual to interpret it as meaning that the style of a writer is that writer’s self, that it reveals the essence of his individuality. That is true, and the statement of it is useful. But it is probably not the meaning, or at least not the original meaning, that Buffon had in mind. It should be recollected that Buffon was a zoologist, and that the phrase occurs in the course of his great Natural History [8, p. 129]. He was considering man in the abstract, and differentiating him from other genera of the animal kingdom. Hence, no doubt, he remarked that “style was man himself”, not as every reviewer repeats the sentence to-day, “the man”. He meant that style, in the variety and elaboration of it, distinguished the language of man (Homo sapiens) from the monotonous roar of the lion or the limited gamut of the bird. Buffon was engaged with biological, not with aesthetic ideas [52, p. 56]. Nevertheless, the usual interpretation given to the phrase “le style est l’homme meme” may be accepted as true and valuable.

According to an Arab legend King Solomon inquired of the djinn, “What is language?” and received the answer, “a wind that passes”. “But how”, continued the wisest of men, “can it be held?” “By one art only”, replied the djinn, “by the art of writing”. It may be well to follow a little closely the processes of this art of writing [2, p. 121]. A human being in the artless condition, in whom, that is to say, the conception of personal expression has not been formed, uses written language to state primitive and general matters of fact. He writes, “The sea is rough to-day; the wind is cold” [12, p. 72]. In these statements there is some observation, but as yet no personal note. We read them without being able to form the very smallest conjecture as to the character or condition of the writer. From these bald and plain words we may rise in degree until we reach Victor Hugo’s celebrated parallel of the ocean with the genius of Shakespeare, where every phrase is singular and elaborate, and every element of expression redolent of Victor Hugo, but of no other person who ever lived. Another example, in its own way still more striking, is found in comparison of the famous paragraph which occurs in the Cyrus-Garden (1658) of Sir Thomas Browne [57, p. 17].

A primitive person would say, “But it is time to go to bed”; this statement is drawn out by Browne into the wonderful page beginning, “But the quincunx of Heaven runs low”, and collects around it as it proceeds on its voluptuous course the five ports of knowledge, cables of cobwebs, the bed of Cleopatra, the ghost of a rose, the huntsmen of Persia, and a dozen other examples of prolific and ornamented style. In its final form it is so fully characteristic of its author that it may be justly said that the passage is Browne himself [3, p. 311]. It follows from what has just been said that style appeals exclusively to those who read with attention and for the pleasure of reading. It is not even perceived by those who read primarily for information, and these form the great majority of readers. Even these have a glimmering impression that we must not live by bread alone; that the human heart, with its imagination, its curiosity and sensitiveness, cannot be satisfied by bald statements of fact delivered on the printed page as messages are shouted along the telephone [25, p. 300]. This instinct it is which renders the untaught liable to fall into those errors of false style to which we shall presently call attention. In the untrained there yet exists a craving for beauty, and the misfortune is that this craving is too easily met by gaudy rhetoric and vain repetitions.

The effect on the nature of a human being which is produced by reading or listening to a book, or a passage from a book, which that being greatly admires, is often so violent as to resemble a physical shock to the nerves. It causes a spasm of emotion, which is betrayed by tears or laughter or a heightened pulse. This effect could not be produced by a statement of the fact conveyed in language, but is the result of the manner in which that fact is presented. In other words, it is the style which appeals so vividly to the physical and moral system of the reader – not the fact, but the ornament of the fact. That this emotion may be, and often is, caused by bad style, by the mere tinsel of rhetoric and jangle of alliteration, is not to the point [14, p. 70]. The important matter is that it is caused by style, whether good or bad. Those juvenile ardors and audacities of expression which so often amuse the wise man and exasperate the pedant are but the effects of style acting on a fervid and unripe imagination. The deep delight with which a grown man of experience reads Milton or Dante is but the same phenomenon produced in different conditions [49, p. 71].

It is, however, desirable at the outset of an inquiry into the elements of style to insist on the dangers of a heresy which found audacious expression towards the close of the 19th century, namely, that style is superior to thought and independent of it. Against this may be set at once another of the splendid apothegms of Buffon,”Les idees seules forment le fond du style” [54, p. 290]. Before there can be style, therefore, there must be thought, clearness of knowledge, precise experience, sanity of reasoning power. It is difficult to allow that there can be style where there is no thought, the beauty even of some poems, the sequence of words in which is intentionally devoid of meaning, being preserved by the characteristics of the meter, the rhymes, and the assonances, all which are, in their degree, intellectual in character. Confusion between form and matter has often confused this branch of our theme [52, p. 31]. Even Flaubert, than whom no man ever gave closer attention to the question of style, seems to dislocate them. For him the form was the work itself: “As in living creatures, the blood, nourishing the body, determines its very contour and external aspect, just so, to his mind, the matter, the basis, is a work of art, imposed, necessarily, the unique, the just expression, the measure, the rhythm, the form in all its characteristics” [1, p. 44].

This ingenious definition seems to strain language beyond its natural limits. If the adventures of an ordinary young man in Paris be the matter of L’Education sentimentale it is not easy to admit that they “imposed, necessarily”, such a “unique” treatment of them as Flaubert so superlatively gave [1, p. 45]. They might have been recounted with feebler rhythm by an inferior novelist, with bad rhythm by a bad novelist and with no rhythm at all by a police-news reporter. What makes that book a masterpiece is not the basis of adventure, but the superstructure of expression. The expression, however, could not have been built up on no basis at all, and would have fallen short of Flaubert’s aim if it had risen on an inadequate basis. The perfect union is that between adequate matter and an adequate form [6, p. 15]. We will borrow from the history of English literature an example which may serve to illuminate this point. Locke has no appreciable style; he has only thoughts. Berkeley has thoughts which are as valuable as those of Locke, and he has an exquisite style as well [51, p. 167]. From the artist’s point of view, therefore, we are justified in giving the higher place to Berkeley, but in doing this we must not deny the importance of Locke.

If we compare him with some pseudo-philosopher, whose style is highly ornamental but whose thoughts are valueless, we see that Locke greatly prevails. Yet we need not pretend that he rises to an equal height with Berkeley, in whom the basis is no less solid, and where the superstructure of style adds an emotional and aesthetic importance to which Locke’s plain speech is a stranger [2, p. 53]. At the same time, an abstract style, such as that of Pascal, may often give extreme pleasure, in spite of its absence of ornament, by its precise and pure definition of ideas and by the just mental impression it supplies of its writer’s distinguished vivacity of mind. The abstract or concrete style, moreover, what Rossetti called “fundamental brain-work” must always have a leading place [2, p. 45]. When full justice has been done to the necessity of thought as the basis of style, it remains true that what is visible, so to speak, to the naked eye, what can be analyzed and described, is an artistic arrangement of words. Language is so used as to awaken impressions of touch, taste, odor and hearing, and these are roused in a way peculiar to the genius of the individual who brings them forth [49, p. 117]. The personal aspect of style is therefore indispensable, and is not to be ignored even by those who are most rigid in their objection to mere ornament. Ornament in itself is no more style than facts, as such, constitutes thought.

In an excellent style there is an effect upon our senses of the mental force of the man who employs it. We discover him in what he writes, as it was excellently said of Chateaubriand that it was into his phrases that he put his heart; again, D’Alembert said of Fontenelle that he had the style of his thought, like all good authors [3, p. 71]. In the words of Schopenhauer, style is the physiognomy of the soul. All these attempts at epigrammatic definition tend to show the sense that language ought to be, and even unconsciously is, the mental picture of the man who writes [53, p. 42]. To attain this, however, the writer must be sincere, original and highly trained. He must be highly trained, because, without the exercise of clearness of knowledge, precise experience and the habit of expression, he will not be able to produce his soul in language. It will, at best, be perceived as through a glass, darkly [52, p. 32]. Nor can anyone who desires to write consistently and well, afford to neglect the laborious discipline which excellence entails. He must not be satisfied with his first sprightly periods; he must polish them, and then polish them again. He must never rest until he has attained a consummate adaptation of his language to his subject, of his words to his emotion.

This is the most difficult aim which the writer can put before him, and it is a light that flits ever onward as he approaches. Perfection is impossible, and yet he must never desist from pursuing perfection [13, p. 12]. In this connection the famous tirade of Tamburlaine in Marlowe’s tragedy cannot be meditated upon too carefully, for it contains the finest definition which has been given in any language of style as the unapproachable fen-fire of the mind: “If all the pens that poets ever held Had fed the feeling of their master’s thoughts, And every sweetness that inspired their hearts, Their minds, and muses, on admired themes If all the heavenly quintessence they ‘still From their immortal flowers of poesy, Wherein, as in a mirror, we perceive The highest reaches of a human wit If those had made one poem’s period, And all combined in beauty’s worthiness, Yet should there hover in our restless heads One thought, one grace, one wonder, at the least. Which into words no virtue can digest” [15, p. 45]. Flaubert believed that every thought or grace or wonder had one word or phrase exactly adapted to express it, and could be “digested” by no other without loss of clearness and beauty. It was the passion of his life, and the despair of it, to search for this unique phrase in each individual case.

Perhaps in this research after style he went too far, losing something of that simplicity and inevitability which is the charm of natural writing [52, p. 20]. It is boasted by the admirers of Flaubert that his style is enamel, and those who say this perhaps forget that the beauty of enamel resides wholly in its surface and not at all in the substance below it. This is the danger which lies in wait for those who consider too exquisitely the value and arrangement of their words. Their style becomes too glossy, too highly varnished, and attracts too much attention to itself. The greatest writing is that which in its magnificent spontaneity carries the reader with it in its flight; that which detains him to admire itself can never rise above the second place [51, p. 76]. Forgetfulness of self, absence of conceit and affectation, simplicity in the sense not of thinness or poorness but of genuineness – these are elements essential to the cultivation of a noble style. Here again, thought must be the basis, not vanity or the desire to astonish [49, p. 84]. We do not escape by our ingenuities from the firm principle of Horace, “scribendi recti sapere est et principium et fons”. In speaking of originality in style it must not be forgotten that memory exercises a strong and often an insidious effect upon writing [59, p. 23].

That which has been greatly admired will have a tendency to impregnate the mind, and its echo, or, what is worse, its cadence, will be unconsciously repeated. The cliché is the greatest danger which lies in wait for the vapid modern author, who is tempted to adopt, instead of the one fresh form which suits his special thought, a word or even a chain of words, which conventionally represents it [24, p. 68]. Thus “the devouring element” was once a striking variant for the short word “fire”, and a dangerous hidden place was once well described as “a veritable death-trap”, but these have long been clichés which can only be used by writers who are insincere or languid. Worse than these are continuous phrases, and even sentences, such as are met with in the leaders of daily newspapers, which might be lifted bodily from their places and inserted elsewhere, so completely have they lost all vitality and reality [1, p. 94]. With regard to the training which those who wish to write well should resign themselves to undergo, there is some difference of opinion, based upon difference of temperament. There are those who believe that the gift of style is inborn, and will reveal itself at the moment of mental maturity without any external help.

There are others who hold that no amount of labor is excessive, if it be directed to a study and an emulation of what are called “the best models” [6, p. 209]. No doubt these theories are both admissible. If a man is not born to write well, no toil in the imitation of Addison or Ruskin will make his style a brilliant one; and a born writer will express himself with exactitude and fire even though he is but an idle student of the classics [22, p. 99]. Yet, on the other hand, the very large number of persons who have a certain aptitude for writing, yet no strong native gift, will undoubtedly cure themselves of faults and achieve skill and smoothness by the study of those writers who have most kinship with themselves. To be of any service, however, it seems that those writers must have used the same language as their pupils. Of the imitation of the ancients much has been written, even to the extent of the publication of manuals. But what is that imitation of the verse of Homer which leads today to Chapman and to-morrow to Pope? What the effect of the study of the prose of Theophrastus which results in the prose of Addison? The good poet or prose-man, however closely he studies an admirable foreign model, is really anxious to say something which has never before been said in his own language.

The stimulus which he receives from any foreign predecessor must be in the direction of analogous or parallel effort, not in that of imitation [51, p. 6]. The importance of words, indeed, is exemplified, if we regard it closely, in this very question, so constantly mooted, of the imitation of the ancients, by the loss of beauty fatally felt in a bad translation. The vocabulary of a great writer has been, as Pater says, “winnowed”; it is impossible to think of Sophocles or of Horace as using a word which is not the best possible for introduction at that particular point [54, p. 23]. But the translator has to interpret the ideas of these ancient writers into a vocabulary which is entirely different from theirs, and unless he has a genius of almost equal impeccability he will undo the winnowing work. He will scatter chaff and refuse over the pure grain which the classic poet’s genius had so completely fanned and freed. The employment of vague and loose terms where the original author has been eclectic, and of a flood of verbiage where he has been frugal, destroys all semblance of style, although the meaning may be correctly preserved [49, p. 53]. The errors principally to be avoided in the cultivation of a pure style are confusion, obscurity, incorrectness and affectation.

To take the earliest of these first, no fault is so likely to be made by an impetuous beginner as a mingling together of ideas, images, propositions which are not on the same plane or have no proper relation. This is that mass of “stunning sounds and voices all confused” which Milton deprecates [2, p. 87]. One of the first lessons to be learned in the art of good writing is to avoid perplexity and fatigue in the mind of the reader by retaining clearness and order in all the segments of a paragraph, as well as propriety of grammar and metaphor in every phrase [49, p. 6]. Those who have overcome this initial difficulty, and have learned to avoid a jumble of misrelated thoughts and sentences, may nevertheless sin by falling into obscurity, which, indeed, is sometimes a willful error and arises from a desire to cover poverty of thought by a semblance of profundity. The meaning of “obscurity” is, of course, in the first instance “darkness”, but in speaking of literature it is used of a darkness which arises from unintelligibility, not from depth of expression, but from cloudiness and fogginess of idea [3, p. 34]. Of the errors of style which are the consequences of bad taste, it is difficult to speak except in an entirely empirical spirit, because of the absence of any absolute standard of beauty by which artistic products can be judged.

That kind of writing which in its own age is extravagantly cultivated and admired may, in the next age, be as violently repudiated; this does not preclude the possibility of its recovering critical if not popular favor. Perhaps the most remarkable instance of this is the revolution made against the cold and stately Ciceronian prose of the middle of the 16th century by the so-called Euphuists [54, p. 65]. This occurred almost simultaneously in several nations, but has been traced to its sources in the Spanish of Guevara and in his English imitators, North and Pettie, whom Lyly in his turn followed with his celebrated Euphues. [2, p. 33] Along with these may not unfairly be mentioned Montaigne in France and Castiglione in Italy, for, although these men were not proficients in Guevara’s artificial manner, his estilo alto, still, by their easiness and brightness, their use of vivid imagery and their graceful illumination, they marked the universal revulsion against the Ciceronian stiffness. Each of these new manners of writing fell almost immediately into desuetude, and the precise and classic mode of writing in another form came into vogue (Addison, Bossuet, Vico, Johnson) [52, p. 83]. But what was best in the ornamental writers of the 16th century is now once more fully appreciated, if not indeed admired to excess. A facility in bringing up before the memory incessant analogous metaphors is the property, not merely of certain men, but of certain ages; it flourished in the age of Marino and is welcomed again in that of Meredith.

A vivid, concrete style, full of color and images, is not to be condemned because it is not an abstract style, scholastic and systematic. It is to be judged on its own merits and by its own laws. It may be good or bad; it is not bad merely because it is metaphorical and ornate [49, p. 32]. The amazing errors which lie strewn along the shore of criticism bear evidence to the lack of sympathy which has not perceived this axiom and has wrecked the credit of dogmatists. To De Quincey, a convinced Ciceronian, the style of Keats “belonged essentially to the vilest collections of waxwork filigree or gilt gingerbread”; but to read such a judgment is to encourage a question whether all discussion of style is not futile [49, p. 21]. Yet that particular species of affectation which encourages untruth, affectation, parade for the mere purpose of producing an effect, must be wrong, even though Cicero be guilty of it. The use of the word “style”, in the sense of the present remarks, is not entirely modern. For example, the early English critic Puttenham says that “style is a constant and continual phrase or tenor of speaking and writing” (1589). But it was in France and in the great age of Louis XIV that the art of writing began to be carefully studied and ingeniously described [55, p. 76].

Mme de Sevigne, herself mistress of a manner exquisitely disposed to reflect her vivacious, tender and eloquent character, is particularly fond of using the word “style” in its modern sense, as the expression of a complete and rich personality. She says, in a phrase which might stand alone as a text on the subject, “Ne quittez jamais le naturel, votre tour s’y est forme, et cela compose un style parfait” [3, p. 69]. Her contemporary, Boileau, contributed much to the study, and spoke with just pride of “mon style, ami de la lumiere” [16, p. 129]. The expression to form one’s style, a se faire un style, appears, perhaps for the first time, in the works of the abbe d’Olivet (1682-1768), who was addicted to rhetorical speculation. Two great supporters of the pure art of writing, Swift and Voltaire, contributed much to the study of style in the 18th century. The former declared that “proper words in proper places make the true definition of a style” the latter, more particularly, that “le style rend singulières les choses les plus communs, fortifie les plus faibles, donne de la grandeur aux plus simples”. Voltaire speaks of “le mélange des styles” as a great fault of the age in which he lived; it has come to be looked upon as a principal merit of that in which we live [51, p. 43].

2. Variety of Texts

Textual types refer to the following four basic aspects of writing: descriptive, narrative, expository, and argumentative. Descriptive text type is based on perception in space. Impressionistic descriptions of landscapes or persons are often to be found in narratives such as novels or short stories. Example: About fifteen miles below Monterey, on the wild coast, the Torres family had their farm, a few sloping acres above the cliff that dropped to the brown reefs and to the hissing white waters of the ocean … [51, p. 78]

Description has its purpose and is used in all forms of writing to create a vivid impression of a person, place, object or event e.g. to: describe a special place and explain why it is special describe the most important person in your life describe the animal’s habitat in your report Descriptive writing is usually used to help a writer develop an aspect of their work, e.g. to create a particular mood, atmosphere or describe a place so that the reader can create vivid pictures of characters, places, objects etc.

Descriptive style has its features, because description is a style of writing which can be useful for a variety of purposes: to engage a reader’s attention to create characters to set a mood or create an atmosphere to bring writing to life. Language aims to show rather than tell the reader what something/someone is like relies on precisely chosen vocabulary with carefully chosen adjectives and adverbs. is focused and concentrates only on the aspects that add something to the main purpose of the description. Sensory description – what is heard, seen, smelt, felt, tasted. Precise use of adjectives, similes, metaphors to create images/pictures in the mind e.g. their noses were met with the acrid smell of rotting flesh. Strong development of the experience that “puts the reader there” focuses on key details, powerful verbs and precise nouns.

Narrative text type is based on perception in time. Narration is the telling of a story; the succession of events is given in chronological order. The basic purpose of narrative is to entertain, to gain and hold a readers’ interest. However narratives can also be written to teach or inform, to change attitudes / social opinions e.g. soap operas and television dramas that are used to raise topical issues. Narratives sequence people/characters in time and place but differ from recounts in that through the sequencing, the stories set up one or more problems, which must eventually find a way to be resolved.

The common structure or basic plan of narrative text is known as the “story grammar”. Although there are numerous variations of the story grammar, the typical elements are: Setting when and where the story occurs. Characters are the most important people or players in the story. Initiating event is an action or occurrence that establishes a problem and/or goal. Conflict/goal the focal point around which the whole story is organized. Events are one or more attempts by the main character(s) to achieve the goal or solve the problem. Resolution is the outcome of the attempts to achieve the goal or solve the problem. Theme is raised in the literary work and has its main idea or moral of the story (the message of the story or novel). The graphic representation of these story grammar elements is called a story map. The exact form and complexity of a map depends, of course, upon the unique structure of each narrative and the personal preference of the teacher constructing the map.

There are many types of narrative. They can be imaginary, factual or a combination of both. They may include fairy stories, mysteries, science fiction, romances, horror stories, adventure stories, fables, myths and legends, historical narratives, ballads, slice of life, personal experience. Characters with defined personalities/identities have their features. Dialogue is often included – tense may change to the present or the future. Descriptive language is used to create images in the reader’s mind and enhance the story. Each story has its structure. In a traditional narrative the focus of the text is on a series of actions: orientation (introduction or exposition) in which the characters, setting and time of the story are established. Usually answers Who? When? Where? E.g. Mr. Wolf went out hunting in the forest one dark gloomy night. [51, p. 45] Complication or problem usually involves the main character(s) (often mirroring the complications in real life). There needs to be a resolution of the complication. The complication may be resolved for better or worse/happily or unhappily. Sometimes there are a number of complications that have to be resolved. These add and sustain interest and suspense for the reader. Further more, when there is plan for writing narrative texts, the focus should be on the following characteristics: Plot: What is going to happen?

Setting: Where will the story take place? When will the story take place? Characterization: Who are the main characters? What do they look like? Structure: How will the story begin? What will be the problem? How is the problem going to be resolved? Theme: What is the theme / message the writer is attempting to communicate?

Expository text type aims at explanation, i.e. the cognitive analysis and subsequent syntheses of complex facts. Example: An essay on “Rhetoric: What is it and why do we study it?”

Argumentative text type is based on the evaluation and the subsequent subjective judgment in answer to a problem. It refers to the reasons advanced for or against a matter [51, p. 49].

3. Mixed Style Terminology

A text, within literary theory, is a coherent set of symbols that transmits some kind of informative message. This set of symbols is considered in terms of the informative message’s content, rather than in terms of its physical form or the medium in which it is represented. In the most basic terms established by structuralist criticism, therefore, a “text” is any object that can be “read”, whether this object is a work of literature, a street sign, an arrangement of buildings on a city block, or styles of clothing [59, p. 62]. Within the field of literary criticism, “text” also refers to the original information content of a particular piece of writing; that is, the “text” of a work is that primal symbolic arrangement of letters as originally composed, apart from later alterations, deterioration, commentary, translations, paratext, etc. Therefore, when literary criticism is concerned with the determination of a “text”, it is concerned with the distinguishing of the original information content from whatever has been added to or subtracted from that content as it appears in a given textual document (that is, a physical representation of text) [51, p. 45]. Since the history of writing predates the concept of the “text”, most texts were not written with this concept in mind. Most written works fall within a narrow range of the types described by text theory.

The concept of “text” becomes relevant if/when a “coherent written message is completed and needs to be referred to independently of the circumstances in which it was created” [49, p. 90]. Style is depth, deviations, choice, context style restricted linguistic variation, and style is the man himself (Buffon) [3, p. 111]. According to Galperin the term ‘style’ refers to the following spheres [59, p. 14]: 1) the aesthetic function of language. It may be seen in works of art- poetry, imaginative prose, fiction, but works of science, technical instruction or business correspondence have no aesthetic value. 2) synonymous ways of rendering one and the same idea. The possibility of choice of using different words in similar situations is connected with the question of style as if the form changes, the contents changes too and the style may be different. 3) expressive means in language – are employed mainly in the following spheres – poetry, fiction, colloquial speech, speeches but not in scientific articles, business letters and others. 4) emotional coloring in language. Very many types of texts are highly emotional – declaration of love, funeral oration, poems (verses), but a great number of texts is unemotional or non-emphatic (rules in textbooks). 5) a system of special devices called stylistic devices.

The style is formed with the help of characteristic features peculiar to it. Many texts demonstrate various stylistic features: She wears ‘fashion’ = what she wears is fashionable or is just the fashion metonymy. 6) the individual manner of an author in making use the individual style of speaking, writing must be investigated with the help of common rules and generalization. Galperin I. distinguishes five styles in present-day English [59, p. 312]: I. Belles Lettres:1. Poetry: 2. Emotive prose: 3. The Drama; II. Publicistic Style:1. Oratory and Speeches: 2. The Essay: 3. Articles; III. Newspapers: 1. brief News Items: 2. Headlines: 3. Advertisements and Announcements: 4. The Editorial; IV. Scientific Prose; V. Official Documents He didn’t single out a colloquial style. Its created by the work of the author –the result of creative activity. Arnold classification consists of four styles [51, p. 75]: 1. Poetic style; 2. Scientific style; 3. Newspaper style; 4. Colloquial style. Singling out a poetic and a scientific style seems valid. But Arnold insists on the validity of the ‘newspaper style’ theory. She says that the specificity of mass media make acknowledgement of newspaper style, as one of functional style. In the handbook by Morokhovsky, Vorobyova, Likhosherst give following classification of style [49, p. 190]: 1. official business style; 2. scientific – professional style; 3. publicistic style;

4. literary colloquial style; 5. familiar colloquial style. M. N. Kozhina lists type – forming and socially significant spheres of communication as follows [24, p. 210]: 1) official, 2) scientific, 3) artistic, 4) publicist, 5) of daily intercourse (=colloquial). Just as in some of the above classification we can doubt the validity of treating separately (and thus opposing) the artistic (belles-lettres) and the publicistic spheres. Not only writers of poetry or fiction, but publicists and orators as well make abundant use of ornament and expressive means of language – tropes and figures first and foremost Problematic aspects: Newspaper style as a part of publicist style. That why it can’t be individual. It has no situation of communication. Newspaper style to give information, to influence, to represent social, political idea, means of persuade. It’s important to concentrate. That is why the text of newspaper style should be organized in the certain style. It must contain elements of stylistic colored words and have certain graphic organization [12, p. 32]. The articles contain questions, the sentence interrogative, elliptical construction and direct speech is included. The use of political words and expressions, clichés, colloquial words, slang, professionalisms, large amount of stylistic devises, various graphical means.

The text of NP style is read by people of different social status. Belles – Letters style is so many colored. It includes features of all the styles if it necessary. The author uses professional words of all levels. The basic function – informative and aesthetic. Poetic style in the past many scholars distinguished this style. Nowadays it included in Belles – Letters style [8, p. 342]. Style of official Documents, here are included the language of business documents, the language of legal documents, diplomacy, military, the function – to achieve the agreement between contrastive parts; has very strict organization. All the words are used in the dictionary meanings, a large number of abbreviations, terms, clichés [58, p. 18]. Publicistic style in the past it named oratorical style. The aim of the style also influence on public opinion, which is in brevity of expression, strong logic, strict organization of syntactical structure, and a wide system of syntactical connection; the use of colloquial words, neutral, direct address to the audience [57, p. 56]. Scientific style is the style of reporting and conveying serious scientific idea. It is connected with oral and written forms. Here are included seminars, sc. articles, discussions, written form – monograph, brochures, and all kinds of academic publications. The aim is to prove a hypothesis. The use of large number of terms. Clarity of expression. The use of references, logical connection with the previous one, interdependence the speeches is usually produced in the second person – you [49, p. 16].

Chapter Two. Reading and Analyzing Texts

Style is the author’s careful choice of words and arrangement of words, sentences, and paragraphs to produce a specific effect on the reader. Style allows the author to shape how the reader experiences the work. One writer may use simple words and straightforward sentences, while another may use complicated vocabulary and elaborate sentence structures. Even if the themes of both works are similar, the differences in the authors’ styles make the experiences of reading the two works distinctly. [58, p. 27].

2.1. Reading and Analyzing S. Maugham’s Stories

W. Somerset Maugham is one of the best known as an accomplished writer of short stories in which craft outweighs formal innovation, yet, in one of the longest literary careers of any British writer, he was most notable for his endless capacity for self-reinvention. Commencing as a late Victorian writer of realist fiction concerning class and gender, Maugham also dabbled in the gothic and adventure romance. As an Edwardian he became one of the most popular playwrights of his generation [7, p. 10]. Growing weary of the limits imposed by conventional dramatic forms, he returned to fiction, publishing his greatest novel, “Of Human Bondage” (1915) [35, p. 4]. His experiences during World War I and after took his writing in two further directions. Through his Ashenden short stories, relying on personal experience as an intelligence agent, he pioneered espionage fiction.

Travels in the South Pacific and later East and Southeast Asia resulted in the exotic fiction for which he is best known [9, p. 106]. Yet we should also not forget that much of Maugham’s fictional production in his later career is concerned with domestic issues, reflecting particularly on the world of Anglophone literary production and authorial celebrity in the first half of the twentieth century. Indeed, Maugham’s greatest fictional work is surely himself. Through thin fictionalization, autobiographical self-representation, destruction of documents, and outright disinformation, Maugham created himself as perhaps the quintessential cosmopolitan English man of letters, an image that has slowly been picked apart by scholars and biographers after his death in 1965 [17, p. 54].

2.1.1. Style Analysis of the story “The Man with the Scar” by S. Maugham W. Somerset Maugham was one of the twentieth century’s most popular novelists as well as a celebrated playwright, critic, and short story writer [11, p. 12]. I have a chance to read some his famous works. Coming with the short story “The Man with the Scar”, We have understood more about his writing style and the meaning of his stories. In the first place, I must say that I am attracted immediately by the title of the story. Like most of all his works, the titles are often strange and able to rouse readers’ curiosity. At the first time accessing to this story, I wonder why it should be “The Man with the Scar”. And at the very beginning lines of the story, the storyteller – a familiar character of his works makes us want to know why the man has this kind of scar? There is no obvious “abstract”, with the possible exception of the title. We are not told what the story is to be about or why we should be reading it. The title, “The Man with the Scar”, is not in itself of any particular significance, though it is natural, in the search for plot-based information, to want to enquire who he is and how he came to get the scar. (It is, for example, possible that ‘scar’ may not mean simply a physical scar, though this is what is initially focused as the ‘theme’ for the first paragraph?) [46, p. 12].

“It was on account of the scar that I first noticed him, for it ran, broad and red, in a great crescent from his temple to his chin.” [46, p. 134]. Most of the information here centers on ‘the man’ and his physical features. This is puzzling, because there seems subsequently to be no point to much of this information. Very little is revealed by the narrator about ‘who’ he is as an individual. In fact, throughout the story ‘the man with the scar’ remains nameless and without an identity. We might conclude that what the man represents may be more significant for the reader than the man himself. Very little is revealed by the first narrator (the ‘I’ figure in the story) about the man’s character, except perhaps that he is sometimes ‘the worse for liquor’. The second narrator – an acquaintance of the first narrator – subsequently reveals that he is ‘an exile from Nicaragua’. The setting for the telling of the narrative is noticeably featureless and bare. Information of an orientation kind – i.e. concerning “who, what, where” – is not marked. It is notably absent from the story’s opening paragraph where such information is conventionally supplied. This is particularly dense in the ‘second’ narrator’s narrative.

Lines 41 to 135 reveal a sequence of almost uninterrupted narrative clauses with few intervening structural features. This constitutes a significant proportion of the action of the story. The action appears not to be evaluated by either narrator, though it could be said that the general’s comments on bravery are evaluative of the action. Though we are, of course, dealing with a translation, the first narrator (‘I’) comments that the ‘high-flown language’ of the story told to him ‘suits the story’, though it is not clear whether we should regard this as a positive or negative evaluation. The action is in one sense ‘resolved’ by the second narrator when reporting the action of the general in pardoning the life of ‘the man with the scar’. There is, however, no resolution of why we have been told the story of the conversation between the narrator and his acquaintance. There is no overtly signaled coda. In fact, the way in which both narrators converge to return the reader to the point at which the narrative was entered with a re-focus on ‘the scar’ is perplexing in its circularity.

Rather than any distinctly extractable ‘message’ about the man, the final ‘sequence’ (even ‘resolution’) of the action serves almost to trivialize the story, most particularly in the way it is conveyed by the first of ‘I’ narrator who is presented as an ‘outsider’ to the action in more senses than one. We might note here briefly that appreciation of such structural effects of narrative shaping can be fostered, in a manner which involves extending activities described above, by asking for students to write their own ‘endings’ to the story. By ‘doing it themselves’ students can begin to appreciate from the inside, as it were, the relationship between narrative structure and how different readers might come to understand and interpret the story in different ways.

2.1.2. Style Analysis of the story “The Luncheon” by S. Maugham A friendly intention of taking an acquaintance out to lunch can result in important revelations about oneself not experienced in other events. This comes to the forefront in Somerset W. Maugham’s anecdotal short story “The Luncheon” [46, p. 97]. The young protagonist, a writer, learns he should not be too generous for fear of being taken advantage of after feeling humiliated and angry because he took a pretentious woman out to lunch. The elements of structure, vivid imagery, symbols and style help to develop the acquaintance’s personality and the protagonist’s feelings from excitement to anger while also delineating to which extent the protagonist’s perception of things has changed for his own good. Structure is important to the evolution of the protagonist’s personal feelings. Initially, the protagonists feels flattered and excited that he has been asked by an older woman to take her out to lunch in one of the fanciest and most expensive restaurants in Paris. Although his financial situation worries him, he wants to please his acquaintance. However, when she begins to order many expensive items, he first worries about how he will pay the bill. Then, he feels humiliated for being used to satisfy her expensive food tastes only.

Next, her insensitive discourse angers him: “I see that you’re in the habit of eating a heavy luncheon. [the protagonist ate only a mutton chop]. I’m sure it’s a mistake. Why don’t you follow my example and just eat one thing? I’m sure you’d feel ever so much better for it”. However, he replies sarcastically, “I am only going to eat one thing”. Finally, the only solution for him is to not care about her and to be as mean to her as she was to him, whenever possible. His final statement shows that he has had his revenge at last… “Today she weighs twenty one stone” [46, p. 90]. Vivid imagery and symbols help reveal the protagonist’s feelings and his acquaintance’s personality. Several times throughout the story, his acquaintance states, “I never eat more than one thing for luncheon”. The luncheon is symbolic of the concept of “the survival of the fittest”. On the one hand, his acquaintance possesses a manipulating and insincere personality, while the protagonist is good, kind, and pleasing. As a result, she gets what she wants while the protagonist must pay the price for taking such a person out to lunch because he is a good person. the color white in the image of “”her white large teeth” and “French white wines” suggests her cold personality [23, p. 65].

The salmon she eats reveals an abundance in the food items she eats pointing to her extravagant personality [23, p. 1391]. The caviar represents her delicate connoisseur tastes [11, p. 89]. Even her age – she is forty – is significant in that “a woman is a devil at forty” [11, p. 200], so that it can be concluded she possesses a devilish nature. The symbolic number one in the acquaintance’s ironic statement, “I never eat more than one thing for luncheon” possesses several qualities evident of her character. It suggests boldness, consciousness and self-centeredness [23, p. 1209]. The latter is the most significant because all she cares about is getting the food she wants. By referring to the head waiter as having a “priest-like face” and a “false face”, the protagonist emphasizes his anger about his financial means. In essence, the waiter and the acquaintance are performing rituals and acting on behalf of their best interests. The acquaintance pursues eating while the waiter expects a fine tip. Style, too, confirms the acquaintance’s personality as well as the protagonist’s illumination. The protagonist, being a down to earth and honest man is not convinced by her contradictory statements and therefore, doesn’t care about her. On the other hand, the protagonist’s style of speaking is sincere and honest even during his angry moments.

At the end when the acquaintance says, “Never eat more than one thing for luncheon” he emotionally releases himself by retorting, “I’ll eat nothing for dinner tonight!” His second release though less stormy, happens when he complacently says, “Today she weighs twenty one stone”. These statements confirm he is no longer flattered by her [46, p. 91]. Style, vivid imagery and symbols as well as structure help develop the protagonist’s initial child-like feelings of flattery and excitement to disgust and anger due to the unfortunate sequence of events causes by his insensitive acquaintance. These elements also create a cold picture of his acquaintance’s personality. However, as he realizes what is happening to him during the course of events, he matures. The moral implications behind the short story “The Luncheon” are the thoughtful steps involved when one commits oneself to taking a stranger out to lunch.

2.1.3. Style Analysis of the story “A Friend in Need” by S. Maugham “A Friend in Need” was written by British writer William Somerset Maugham. The main idea of this short story is that the judgment of a person from his or her appearance is not necessarily reliable [46, p. 12]. “As the follower of Maupassant, Maugham values the plot, especially the final twist.”[38, p. 56] In this short story the development is quite intriguing since the introduction is a kind of monologue of the narrator, proclaiming that first impression of a person is not always right. The complication part is told in a plain, matter-of-fact way, in which the narrator just describes how he makes an acquaintance with Edward and how Edward strikes him. The title of the short story is an inter-text that connects the short story to the text of the proverb: “A friend in need is a friend indeed”. Its manifest allusion to this well-known proverb arouses certain expectations on the part of the reader who assumes that the story is going to deal with friendship. Having initially a positive meaning, the syntagm ‘a friend in need’ inclines the reader to hear the story of true friends who help each other in hard times. The short story ‘A Friend in Need’ reveals the dark side of the human nature where the notion of friendship is distorted. It alludes to the proverb but due to its ironic twist it distorts its initial positive meaning, putting the texts in antonymic relation with the original meaning of the proverb: Sense of the Story vs. Sense of the Proverb.

The author does not include the whole saying but only its first part, the second is deduced before and after reading the entire story. In the first case it is the expression of the proverb, whereas in the second, it is the expression of the story itself which denies what was stated in the original text and results in: a friend in need is not a friend indeed. The relation between the story and the proverb is distorted as there is no explicit narration about friends helping each other. It implies that they are opposed to each other. This becomes clear only after reading the short story. Whereas, in the process of reading, the short story through its title makes a direct reference to the text of the proverb and its original meaning. Initially the short story was entitled ‘The Man Who Wouldn’t Hurt a Fly’ [32, p. 28], which also echoes the idiomatic expression: ‘wouldn’t harm / hurt a fly’ meaning that such a person is incapable of doing harm and is always kind. In addition to inter-textual relation (i.e. the allusion to the idiomatic expression), there is also an intra-textual one as the expression is used in the story itself when the author describes the main character as the one who ‘could not bear to hurt a fly’ [29, p. 30]. Just like in the previous case the true ironic meaning of the phrase is understood only after reading the short story.

The story ‘A Friend in Need’ is a polyphonic narration by different voices. From the very first paragraph, W. S. Maugham uses different pronouns such as: ‘I’, ‘we’, ‘they’ and ‘you’. The first person personal pronoun is the narrator, the author’s mouthpiece. He bridges the gap which might exist between him and his reader with the help of the inclusive pronoun ‘we’, making the reader contribute his own experience to the narration: ‘I suppose it is on the face that for the most part we judge the persons we meet’. The collaboration is meant to agree on the fact that people can look different from the way they really are, which is an allusion to the well-known proverbial expression: appearances can be deceiving. It also reminds the reader not to ‘judge a book by its cover’. Yet, chronologically it is impossible as the story was written in 1925, whereas the idiom ‘don’t judge a book by its cover’ was first recorded only 1929 in an American speech and was popularized in the 60s. This proves the hypothesis that all texts are interconnected and that text formation is an on-going processing of linguistic and personal occurrences which are reactualized in everyday speech [48, p. 75].

In order to seal the ties of the above-mentioned collaboration, W. S. Maugham introduces three alien voices rendered through the plural form of the third person personal pronoun. In this way, he creates a circle of trust consisting of him and his reader where the others are the intruders, but with whose help he succeeds in voicing other texts. For example, in the first case ‘they’ stands for the authors of novels who fail to render the self-contradicting nature of the human beings making their characters ‘all of a piece’. It is the classic hero – villain distribution, which is non-existent in real life. In the second example, ‘they’ is referred to the authors of ‘books on logic’ who try to explain everything within the framework of a logical formula and reject any trace of illogical behavior in people. Finally, ‘they’ is used for the people who ‘tell me that their first impressions of a person are always right’ [27, p. 43]. At the same time, W. S. Maugham avoids imposing his assertions on his reader. He ends the first paragraph with: ‘For my own part I find that the longer I know people the more they puzzle me: my oldest friends are just those of whom I can say that I don’t know the first thing about them’.

However, this seemingly modest conclusion evokes Socrates’ well-known statement: ‘I know that I know nothing’ [11, p. 70]. As the narration unveils, a new character is introduced whose death made the author reflect upon how misleading appearances can be. The character of Edward Hyde Burton is depicted an ‘all-of-a-piece’ type of men, at least, this is the way he looked: ‘Here if ever was a man all of a piece. He was a tiny little fellow, not much more than five feet four in height, and very slender, with white hair, a red face much wrinkled, and blue eyes’. His appearance bespoke a very kind nature: ‘His voice was gentle; you could not imagine that he could possibly raise it in anger; his smile was benign.’ All his features indicate that he is a positive character, one who ‘could not bear to hurt a fly’ [46, p. 92]. The author insists on portraying Edward Hyde Burton’s distinguished features in order to prove, that people are wrong when they judge a person’s appearance and not his essence. He goes on by telling us: ‘Here was a man who attracted you because you felt in him a real love for his fellows’. This sentence reflects the Biblical Golden Rule ‘love thy neighbor as thyself’ and the parable of the Good Samaritan [4, p. 400]. The character of Edward Hyde Burton is also the type of the self-made man: ‘He was a rich man and he had made every penny himself’.

Thus, the author builds the figure of a man who worked hard to pave his way from ‘rags to riches’. Consequently the reader is free to recall any person in history who rose from poverty to prosperity as, for example, Benjamin Franklin did. However, the contemporary reader would rather think of Bill Gates instead. Different texts interact in the reader’s mind while decoding the new text. In the third paragraph W. S. Maugham introduces the exclusive ‘we’, which comprises the narrator and the main character. Nonetheless, the author does not want to lose his reader’s presence in the story, that is why, he uses the pronoun ‘you’ directly engaging the reader to contribute his own experience to the story. This is supposed to help decode its message. The narration goes on with a completely new narrative structure where ‘I’ the narrator, author’s mouthpiece, gives the floor to the other first-person narrator, Edward Hyde Burton. The appearance of this self-contradicting voice is aimed at revealing how a ‘friend’ in need makes fun of his desperate ‘neighbour’. This distinct voice has its own truth and appears as a mediator between similar types of characters and the narrative web of the story.

It helps create the effect of verisimilitude. It is interesting to point out that a secondary character, Turner, mentioned by accident in the conversation, makes Edward Hyde Burton tell his rather ‘funny story’. Turner’s presence can be viewed as an inter-text, that is, the knowledge the readers share about this character allows them to picture another person, Lenny Burton. Both of them are the prototypes of the dissipated character whose life is ruined because of excessive gambling and idleness. And it is namely this image that Edward Hyde Burton has in mind when he exclaims: ‘They generally do’ referring to the pitiful situation a gambler gets into. The plural form of the third person pronoun includes all the people whom the main character considers as failures. In judging so he makes use of the previously created image of ‘little tin gods’ who waste their life aimlessly and who are not to be bothered with when they are in trouble. However, Edward Hyde Burton treats such people as a necessary evil, as a kind of entertainment, to be more specific. It is great to spend his free time in their company, but not to have business with them.

Once they lose their enjoyment function they lose their right to live. In order to prove this idea the author interferes with the narration with the help of his first narrator who testifies to how graceful Edward Hyde Burton could be when losing his money at bridge. He bases his assertion on the several occasions when they happened to play bridge together. Another case of inter-textuality is represented by Edward Hyde Burton’s detailed recounting of the conversation that took place between Lenny Burton and himself. The framing technique allows the author to construct a unified whole. Now it is Edward Hyde Burton who is the narrator and Lenny Burton – the failure; the former has the domineering role of a self-assured person while the latter has the weak voice of a desperate man. Their communicative behavior is typical of the types they represent: one is imposing and the other is accepting. It can be seen from the following table: Table 1

Inter-textuality in Edward Hyde Burton and Lenny Burton communicative behavior

|Edward Hyde Burton |Lenny Burton | |I couldn’t help laughing. |He went rather pale. | |I’ve known too many men who were little tin gods at the universities |He hesitated. | |to be impressed by it. |He hadn’t a penny. | |I could hardly believe my ears; it seemed such an insane answer to |He was down and out. | |give. |If he couldn’t get something to do he’d have to commit suicide. | |Suddenly I had an idea |I can swim. | |I didn’t say anything. |He was rather taken aback. | |I shrugged my shoulders. |He looked at me for a moment and then he nodded. |

As seen, Lenny Burton does not speak much. Edward Hyde Burton gives him very little space in his narration and most of the time the character refers to his namesake as ‘he’. It is only in extreme cases when he uses direct speech, namely when he wants to emphasize his interlocutor’s desperation and ridiculousness. The main character seems to enjoy superior rights whereas the young man has fewer speaking rights here. His voice is weak; yet, it is distinct and helps the reader picture his deplorable situation better. At the same time, Edward Burton’s domineering voice creates the image of a mischievous boss. At the end of the short story the narrator’s voice reappears to help the reader get to the core of Edward Hyde Burton’s personality. With the help of an ironic twist the reader is to realize that from the very beginning the main character has condemned his namesake to death. It comes as a shock producing the effect of a blow. However, the reader cannot say that he did not exclude such an outcome as W. S. Maugham provided enough internal and external linguistic sources which were meant to make his reader activate them in the process of reading.

All these voices represent texts interacting with each other in the course of the narration and which help create the unity of the entire story. They direct the reader in the answer’s direction so that he may decode the writer’s intended message. At the end the literary text appears to be an inter-text which bridges the author’s original text and the reader’s newly (re)created text. The original text represents the author’s work who wanted to communicate something to his reader. Being part of a particular historical and social context his message would be influenced by it. On the opposite side, there is the new text (re)constructed by the reader who, in his turn, was influenced by his particular background. It is a communication between the two parties where the sender tries to influence in a particular way the receiver. The literary work becomes an inter-text formed of various voices, which are not only the characters’ voices but also the writer’s and the reader’s. If the writer’s voice may be sometimes very clear, then the reader’s voice is formed of the reader’s cultural and social background. The smaller the distance between the original and the new texts is the closer the reader is to decoding the author’s intended message. This distance also explains the variety of interpretations one and the same text may have. The effect a literary work produces on the reader is to make him decode the message by using other texts which might help get a better understanding of the message.

Focusing on poetic effect, Robert Frost says: ‘For me the initial delight is in the surprise of remembering something I didn’t know I knew’ [5, p. 90]. That is how the feeling of having heard or felt something similar to the things narrated in the story is achieved. The plurality of distinct voices in the narration interacts with the reader’s experience. This interaction is inter-textual as it connects everything: the author’s message, the reader’s understanding, the internal structure of the story, the explicit allusion to other texts. Inter-textuality is more than a technique of allusion. It is an intricate process of interconnectedness that exists within and outside a communicative act which form a link in the cultural web of human creation [6, p. 78].

2.2. Reading and Analyzing B. Obama’s speeches

Public speaking is an art of oral expression and an ideal means of social communication. With the development of society and the improvement of science and technology, the important social functions of public speeches are highly valued in every aspects of our society. During the process of the U.S. presidential election of 2008, Obama created a magical and fascinating legend. His infectious language and exquisite speaking skills make a crucial contribution to his success and help him become the new president of America [21]. In order to convey his policies and ideas, Obama frequently uses the material process, relational process and metal process, but he seldom uses the verbal, existential and behavioral process. For the purpose of realizing the function of persuading, he pays more attention to the choice of words and the flexible use of tenses. For example, he tends to choose ‘we’ as the Subject of the clauses in his speeches to shorten the distance between himself and his listeners.

The present tense is frequently employed, which is followed by the past tense. The present tense makes the information he delivered sounds reliable. The past tense is mainly used to bridge the past and the present and to enhance the contrast between them. The future tense, which shares only a small proportion, is chiefly employed to elaborate his political view. In addition, the median and low value modal operators are constantly appeared in his speeches to help him establish an amiable image. Lastly, as far as the textual function is concerned, the unmarked Theme is constantly employed to make his speeches easy to be understood. In terms of the patterns of thematic progression, the parallel and linear patterns are the most frequently used ones. He uses various patterns of thematic progression to make his speeches coherent in content and variegated in structure.

2.2.1. Style Analysis of B. Obama’s Inauguration Speech Higher level English learners always pay attention to English public speech, especially those inaugural speeches. They take them as fine literary efforts and good analysis material. This chapter tries to give an analysis of Obama’s inaugural speech from stylistic perspective, in order to help to better appreciate Obama’s presentation skills. Keywords: stylistics, syntactic, lexics, rhetoric [26, p. 12]. Barack Hussein Obama was elected to be the forty-fourth president of America in November, 2008. His inaugural speech didn’t have very beautiful words, but it set up from people psychology and gave a general conclusion of present world. Therefore, his speech won many people’s support and trust with its strong infection and dramatically inspired American’s feelings and confidence [21]. Here we try to give a stylistic analysis on Obama’s inaugural speech from lexical, syntactic and rhetoric levels, to reveals its style characteristics. 1. Lexical level. Word is the basic grammar unit. Different styles require using different words. Meanwhile the different stylistic colorings of the words also determine their different applicable scope. Here we would analyze Obama’s speech from two aspects in the lexical level. A. Word structure.

According to M.A.K. Halliday’s concept of register, word structure is seriously affected by the mode of discourse, the tenor of discourse, the relationship between speaker and listeners, the field of discourse and what being said. The length of a word often has a close relationship with the formality of the text. In English, we often call those words containing six or above six letters, or three or above three syllables as BIG WORD [16, p. 700]. Generally an essay could show its formality by using a certain number of big words. In Obama’s inaugural speech, the whole text has 2395 words while the number of big words is 664, which make up 27.7% of the total. However, the proportion of big word in daily language is often less than 20%. So relatively, the inauguration speeches used more formal words and their word structure is more complex. These shows up in two aspects: Firstly, in inaugural speech, presidents always use formal language. This not only to show stability but also would make the audience feel speaker is serious in politics. So, in Obama’s inaugural speech, there are such formal words: “bestow”, “sacrifice”, “generosity”, “oath”, “prosperity”, “forebear”, “document” and so on.

Secondly, inaugural speech always has many derivational words. Such words would establish more complex vocabulary internal structure and can make speech more formal. In Obama’s speech, there are also such words: “cooperation”, “transition”, “recrimination”, “growth”, “imagination”, “retirement”. B. The use of person. In public speech, the first person is most common. This is because the first person would help speaker to state his viewpoint and strike a chord with his listeners. In Obama’s speech, the first person plural pronoun and its variant used for 83 times, such as out of many, we are one; that while we breathe, we hope. The use of first person has pulled speaker closer with the audience, putting the both in the same position. Thereby the speech would more likely to be accepted and to arouse Americans’ solidarity patriotic feeling. For instance, in Obama’s speech there is such sentence: And where we are met with cynicism and doubts and those who tell us that we can’t, we will respond with that timeless creed that sums up the spirit of a people: Yes, we can. 2. Syntactical level. Generally speaking, sentence is often seemed as the orderly arrangement of words.

Based on the above analyses, we can deduce that Obama’s inaugural speech has its own feature in syntactical level. A. The length of sentence. The length of sentence depends on the style type of the text. In Obama’s inaugural speech, there are 107 sentences, 2395 words. Among them, there are 21 sentences that include 1-9 words, accounting for 19.6% of the total; 33 sentences that include 10-19 words, accounting for 30.8%; 28 sentences that include 20-29 words, accounting for 26.2%; 13 sentences that include 30-39 words, accounting for 12.1%; 12 sentences that include more than 40 words, accounting for 11.2%. The data shows that Obama prefer to use short and long sentences in his inaugural speech. Short sentence can not only make his speech more vivid and exciting, but also make his expression more powerful. Meanwhile, long sentence can express ideas more clearly. Thus in Obama’s alternate use of the short and long sentence make his inaugural speech sounds neither too single nor too rigmarole. B. The use of imperative sentence and interrogative sentence. In Obama’s inaugural speech, most sentences are declarative sentences. But imperative sentences and interrogative sentences are also widely used here. For example: “…let us ask ourselves —if our children should live to see the next century; if my daughters should be so lucky to live as long as Ann Nixon Cooper, what change will they see What progress will we have made”. Imperative sentences are used to make requests or call for action.

They are direct and powerful. Interrogative sentences always make people think and resonate with the speaker. The vivid usage of such sentences made Obama’s inaugural speech more incited. 3. Rhetorical level. For any style of text, it’s very important to beautify the language and the use of rhetorical devices is one of the most effective way to do this. For public speech, strong infection and agitation are necessary and important. Especially in inaugural speech, the aim of the speaker is to win support and trust, so they have to use rhetorical devices to gain desired results. Here in Obama’s inaugural speech, there are also many rhetorical devices: A. Parallelism. Parallelism means giving two or more parts of the sentences a similar form so as to give the whole a definite pattern. It facilitates to express strong feeling, highlight the emphasis part and make the language more powerful. At the same time, because of it own syntactic feature, using parallelism can enhance the aesthetics of rhymes of the language. In Obama’s speech, he used many parallelisms here. e.g.: (1) This is the price and the promise of citizenship. This is the source of our confidence… This is the meaning of our liberty and our creed… (2)

I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you have bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors. (3) At these moments, America has carried on not simply because of the skill or vision of those in high office, but because we the People have remained faithful to the ideals of our forebears, and true to our founding documents. (4) For us, they packed up their few worldly possessions and traveled across oceans in search of a new life. For us, they toiled in sweatshops and settled the West; endured the lash of the whip and plowed the hard earth. For us, they fought and died, in places like Concord and Gettysburg; Normandy and Khe Sahn. From the above examples we can see that parallelism could enhance the coherence of the language and illustrate speaker’s point layer upon layer successively. B. Climax. Climax means when we arrange the clauses of a sentence, we should based on some principle such as ascending to achieve forcefulness. It shows the feature of the foregrounding of public speech. According to climax, we should use appropriate words to give an increasing layer in semantics to win a better effect.

Here we also can see Obama’s flexible use of climax in his inaugural speech. e.g. (1) The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift. (2) Our minds are no less inventive, our goods and services no less needed than they were last week or last month or last year. (3) …that we have duties to ourselves, our nation and the world. C. Repetition. Repetition is the device that using the same words or sentences in one language segment intentionally. It can highlight some strong feeling to leave a deep impression to the audience. e.g.: (1) Today I say to you that the challenges we face are real. They are serious and they are many. They will not be met easily or in a short span of time. But know this, America: They will be met. (2)…the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness. (3) Our workers are no less productive than when this crisis began. Our minds are no less inventive, our goods and services no less needed than they were last week or last month or last year. Our capacity remains undiminished. (4)

We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All these above sentences are examples of repetition in Obama’s inaugural speech. The repetition of words can help to establish a certain rhythm in a structure. Obama used such repetition to express his strong feeling, letting listeners know that the new government has the confidence to resolve all these hard problems before Americans. D. Contrast. Contrast is the way to give comparison between two opposite concepts or things, or between two opposite aspects of one thing.

Obama used sharp contrasts in his inaugural speech to express his idea more vivid and clearly. e.g.: (1) And so to all other people and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born: … (2) Know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. (3) For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. In conclusion, Obama’s inaugural speech has the general features of inaugural speech, such as vivid words, flexible syntax and skillful rhetoric. Besides Obama’s individual styles, these features also considered the need of social reality. Although our stylistic analysis, it can help us well appreciate American presidents’ inaugural speech and enhance our presentation skills in daily life.