GENERAL NOTES ON FUNCTIONAL STYLES OF LANGUAGE

We have defined the object,of linguo-stylistics as the study of the nature, functions and structure^ SDs and EMs, on the one hand, and the study of the functional styles, on the other. In section 2 of this In­troduction (p. 25) we have outlined the general principles on which the notions of EMs and SDs rest.

It is now time to outline the general principles on which functional styles rest. A functional style of language is a system of interrelated language means which serves a definite aim in communication. A func­tional style is thus to be regarded as the product of a certain concrete task set by the sender of the message. Functional styles appear mainly in the literary standard of a language.

The literary standard of the English language, like that of any other developed language, is not so homogeneous as it may seem. In fact the standard English literary language in the course of its development has fallen into several subsystems each of which has acquired its own peculiarities which are typical of the given functional style. The members of the language community, especially those who are sufficiently trained and responsive to language variations, recognize these styles as indepen­dent wholes. The peculiar choice of language means is primarily predeter­mined by the aim of the communication with the result that a more or less closed system is built up. One set of language media stands in op­position to other sets.of language media with other aims, and these other sets have other choices and arrangements of language means.

What we here call functional styles are also called registers or d i s с о u r s e s.

In the English literary standard we distinguish the following major functional styles (hence FS):

1) The language of belles-lettres.

2) The language of publicistic literature.

3) The language of newspapers.

4) The language of scientific prose.

5) The language of official documents.

As has already been mentioned, functional styles are the product of the development of the written variety of language. l Each FS may be characterized by a number of distinctive features, leading or subordi­nate, constant or changing, obligatory or optional. Most of the FSs, however, are perceived as independent wholes due to a peculiar combi­nation and interrelation of features common to all (especially when taking into account syntactical arrangement) with the leading ones of each FS.

Each FS is subdivided into a number of substyles. These represent varieties of the abstract invariant. Each variety has basic features com­mon to all the varieties of the given FS and peculiar features typical of this variety alone. Still a substyle can, in some cases, deviate so far from the invariant that in its extreme it may even break away.

We clearly perceive the following substyles of the five FSs given above.

The belles-lettres FS has the following substyles:

япя ha?“ 5?s not mean, however, that the spoken communications lack individuality al stvle ' stinct stYles of their own. Folklore, for example, is undoubtedly a function-therefore plasmucl:1.as it has a definite aim in communicating its facts and ideas, and is our attention^ r*Zec* ^У а deliberately chosen language means. Here we shall confine dard. Those t *° s^udy of the functional styles bred within the literary written stan-" of mouth suh eS °^ literature which began life purely as speech, were passed on by word lore. ' ec*Uently perpetuated in writing, are left to the care of specialists in folk-

Не нашли, что искали? Воспользуйтесь поиском: