Types of Syntactic Connection Viewed Stylistically
Words, phrases, clauses, and sentences are connected with one another in speech. Words and phrases are mostly combined with their environment semantically, sometimes by means of auxiliary elements (prepositions and conjunctions). Clauses and independent sentences can be joined to one another asyndetically (in this case the connection is purely semantical); more often, conjunctions or other connectors are employed.
Stylistically relevant are changes in the type of connection between the aforementioned units.
Detachment. There are two types of relations between parts of the sentence directly opposed to each other. The first is the subject — predicate (or the theme — rheme) relation. To the second type belongs any other connection: that of an attribute to its head-word, of an object or an adverbial modifier to its predicate verb. Connections of the second type resemble one another: as distinct from the predicative connection which marks the act of communication, the other three serve the purpose of naming, not the purpose of sending new information to the listener (reader). Attributive, objective and adverbial word combinations perform virtually the same function in speech as do single words. This can be easily proved by comparing the following pairs of examples:
She was a beautiful woman. — She was a beauty. He spoke indistinctly. — He mumbled. We exchanged letters. — We corresponded.
Thus, we have established two polar types of syntactical relations within the sentence: the communicative type and the nominative type.
Between these two types, however, there is an intermediate type, effected by the 'detachment' of a secondary part of the sentence. Detachment is specific phonetical treatment of a word or word-group: instead of the usual articulation when the word (phrase) is fused with its environment, the speaker makes a short pause before (and often after)
the detached segment and lays special stress on it. As a result of this, the word (phrase) appears to be opposed to the rest of the sentence — to what precedes it and follows it. Hence, the detached part is underlined as something specially important. From the viewpoint of communicative syntax, it acquires a 'rheme-like' status — it becomes 'semi-communicative', not just nominative.
In writing and in print, detached parts are separated from the rest of the sentence by punctuation marks (mostly by commas or dashes). Unusual placement in the sentence (inversion — see above) is also a sure sign of detachment.
|
|
|
The general stylistic effect of detachment is strengthening, emphasizing the word (or phrase) in question. Besides, detachment imparts additional syntactical meanings to the word or phrase. The second of the following two sentences comprises a detached phrase which can be qualified as an adverbial modifier of concession:
"I met John with his friend the other day." "How could John, with his heart of gold, leave his family?" Practically speaking, any secondary part may be detached:
Attribute: "Very small and child-like, he never looked more than fourteen."
Appositive: "Brave boy, he saved my life and shall not regret it." (Twain)
Adverbial modifier:
"And my soul from out that shadow that lies floating on the floor Shall be lifted nevermore!" (Рое)
Direct object: "Talent, Mr. Micawberhas, capital, Mr. Micawber has not." (Dickens)
Prepositional object: "It was indeed, to Forsyte eyes, an odd house." (Galsworthy)
Subordination and coordination. Clauses and independent sentences are combined either by way of subordination or coordination. Besides, they may be combined asyndetically, in which case it is hard to say whether we observe asyndetic subordination or asyndetic coordination.
It often happens that the same semantic relations between two neighbouring utterances may be expressed in three different ways:
"When the clock struck twelve, he came" — subordination.
"The clock struck twelve, and he came" — coordination.
"The clock struck twelve, he came" — asyndetic connection.
The reader must know from his own experience that the use of complex sentences, especially with complicated phrasal conjunctions (or, to be more exact, set phrases used as 'conjunction equivalents' for a conjunction can never be a phrase: it is a word, one word, as any other part of speech),
such as in view of the fact that or with regard to the circumstances of which... is a sure sign of formal written types of speech. True, the use of complex sentences is by no means alien to everyday oral communication, only the conjunctions preferred are much simpler — when, where, if and the like.
|
|
|
But on the whole, in oral speech we mostly find either asyndeton, or frequent use of the 'universal' coordinative conjunction and. Its function becomes clear only due to the general semantic correlation of the clauses combined.
"You never can tell in these cases how they are going to turn out and it's best to be on the safe side." (Dreiser)
Here, the conjunction and evidently signalizes the relation of cause and consequence between the two clauses.
"Open that silly mouth of yours just once, and you'll find yourself in jail, right alongside the black boy!" (Gow and D'Usseau) This compound sentence is an equivalent of a complex sentence with a subordinate clause of condition (If you open...).
"It is funny that they [the mice] should be there, and not a crumb, since Mr. Timothy took to not coming down just before the war." (Galsworthy)
Here, the conjunction and introduces something like an adverbial clause of concession (although there is not a crumb here...).
What is naturally expressed by coordinating conjunctions in ordinary speech, may be rather artificially made into a complex sentence with a pedantic subordinate clause (in legal matters):
"I gave the key to Mr. Smith, who then passed it to Mrs. Brown." What the witness had really said before his testimony was put to paper, looked simpler and shorter:
"I gave the key to John, and he to Jane."
Parenthetic words, phrases and sentences. They either express modality of what is predicated or imply additional information, mostly evaluating what is said or supplying some kind of additional information. Parenthetic elements comprising additional information seem to be a kind of protest against the linear character of the text: the language user interrupts himself trying in vain to say two things at once.
Words, phrases and sentences of modal meaning may be divided into two classes: those expressing certainty and such as imply different degrees of probability.
Examples of the first class are logically superfluous: they do not add anything to what is meant without them, except showing the speaker's own doubt of what he says and his attempt to make himself believe what he says.e
|
|
|
Compare John will come tomorrow with John will surely come tomorrow, John will certainly come tomorrow, John will come tomorrow, for sure, John will come tomorrow, I'm sure.
Modal words, phrases, and sentences of the second class are essential: they turn a positive statement into mere supposition (maybe, perhaps, probably, presumably, I suppose, I guess, etc.)- Examples would be superfluous.
Parenthetic segments comprising additional information perform a number of stylistic functions.
One of the most important potentialities of such parentheses is the creation of the second plane, or background, to the narrative, or a mingling of 'voices' of different speech parties (cf. the metaphorical term introduced by M.M. Bakhtin: 'polyphony').
In the following extract one can see the feverish succession of thoughts in Clyde Griffiths' mind:
"... he was struck by the thought (what devil's whisper? — what
evil hint of an evil spirit?) — supposing that he and Roberta — no,
say he and Sondra — (no, Sondra could swim so well, and so could
he) — he and Roberta were in a small boat somewhere and it should
capsize at the very time, say, of this dreadful complication which
was so harassing him? What an escape! What a relief from a gigantic
and by now really destroying problem! On the other hand — hold —
not so fast! — for could a man even think of such a solution in
connection with so difficult a problem as this without committing
a crime in his heart, really — a horrible, terrible crime?" (Dreiser)
In other cases, the parenthetic form of a statement makes it more
conspicuous, more important than it would be if it had the form of a
subordinate clause. The following example serves to illustrate it:
"The main entrance (he had never ventured to look beyond that) was a splendiferous combination of a glass and iron awning, coupled with a marble corridor lined with palms." (Dreiser) Compare the possible variety beyond which he had never ventured to look. It sounds like a casual, not very expressive remark made in passing. As distinct from subordinate clauses, parentheses are independent enough to function as exclamatory or interrogative segments of declarative sentences:
|
|
|
"Here is a long passage — what an enormous prospective I make of it! — leading from Peggoty's kitchen to the front door." (Dickens)
"That bit of gold meant food, life... power to go on writing and — who was to say? — maybe to write something that would bring in many pieces of gold." (London)
NOTES
1 See: Maltzev VA. Essays on English Stylistics. — Minsk, 1984.
1 Ситнова НЛ. Эллипсис строевых (служебных) элементов в английской разговорной речи: Автореф. дисс... канд. филол. наук. — Одесса, 1978.
• Ситнова НЛ., idem.
* See, for instance: Ganshina M., Vasilevskaya N. English Grammar. — M., 1962.
1 Kruisinga E. A Handbook of Present-Day English. English Accidence and Syntax. —
Groningen, 1932. " For details see: Skrebnev Y.M. Parenthese und Absonderung // Zeitschrift fUr Anglistik
und Amerikanistik. — Berlin, 1959,1. S. 58-63.
Дата добавления: 2016-01-04; просмотров: 86; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!