Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-2plfb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T17:17:08.800Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Literature as Discourse

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 November 2010

Roger Fowler
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

I would say that syntax is a significant, if shifty, index of a writer's perspective on his subject-matter. In this light, please consider the syntax of my title. It is two nouns connected by a logical term, ‘as’. On one version of the programme for this lecture series, the word ‘as’ is misprinted as ‘and’; this makes a big difference. A simple conjunction of two nouns, ‘Literature and Discourse’, would suggest that I accept the meanings of the two words as stable, unanalysed. The connective ‘as’, however, is intended to announce that this juxtaposition of the two noun terms is an analysis of the two nouns, particularly the first – an examination of the nature of the first term in the light of the meaning of the second.

Type
Papers
Information
Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements , Volume 10 , March 1976 , pp. 174 - 194
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy and the contributors 1975

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Austin, J . L.How to Do Things with Words (1962), Oxford, Clarendon.Google Scholar
Bakhtin, M.Problems of Dostoevsky's Poetics (1973), Trans. Rostel, R. W., Arbor, Ann, Ardis, .Google Scholar
Barthes, R.Elements of Semiology (1967; first published 1964), Trans. Lavers, Annette and Smith, Colin. London, Jonathan Cape.Google Scholar
Carr, E. H.What is History? (1964), London, Penguin.Google Scholar
Chatman, S. B. (Ed.). Literary Style: A Symposium (1971), London, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chatman, S. B. (Ed.). Approaches to Poetics: Selected Papers from the English Institute, 1972 (1973), New York, Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chatman, S. B. ‘The Structure of narrative transmission’ (1975), in Fowler, (1975a), 213–57.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. ‘The formal nature of language’ (1967), in Lenneberg, (1967). 397–442.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N.Language and Mind (1968), New York, Harcourt, Brace, and World.Google Scholar
Croce, B.History as the Story of Liberty (1941), London, Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Firth, J. R.Papers in Linguistics, 1934–1951 (1957), London, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fowler, R. (Ed.). Style and Structure in Literature (1975a), Oxford, Blackwell.Google Scholar
Fowler, R. ‘Language and the reader: Shakespeare's Sonnet 73’ (1975b), in Fowler, (1975a), 79–122.Google Scholar
Fowler, R.Linguistics and The Novel (1977), London, Methuen.Google Scholar
Fowler, R. ‘The referential code and narrative authority’ (forthcoming, Language and Style.Google Scholar
Garvin, P. (Ed.). A Prague School Reader on Esthetics, Literary Structure and Style (1964), Washington, Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Giglioli, P. P. (Ed.). Language and Social Context (1972), London, Penguin.Google Scholar
Goffman, E.The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (1969), London, Penguin.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. ‘Language structure and language function’ (1970), in Lyons, (1970), 140–65.Google Scholar
Hymes, D. (Ed.). Language in Culture and Society (1964), New York, Harper.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R. ‘Closing statement: linguistics and poetics’ (1960), in Sebeok, (1960), 350–77.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R., and L., Jones. Shakespeare's Verbal Art in ‘Th’Expence of Spirit’ (1970), The Hague, Mouton.Google Scholar
Jakobson, R., and Lévi-Strauss, Cl.. ‘“Les Chats” de Charles Baudelaire’. L'Homme (1962), 2, 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kachru, B. B., and Stahlke, F. W. (Eds.). Current Trends in Stylistics (1972), Edmonton, Alberta, Linguistic Research Inc.Google Scholar
Laver, J., and Hutcheson, S. (Eds.). Communication in Face to Face Interaction (1972), London, Penguin.Google Scholar
Lemon, L. T., and Reis, M. J. (Eds.). Russian Formalist Criticism (1965), Lincoln, Nebraska, University of Nebraska Press.Google Scholar
Lenneberg, E. H.Biological Foundations of Language (1967), New York, Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lyons, J. (Ed.). New Horizons in Linguistics (1970), London, Penguin.Google Scholar
Mukařovský, J. ‘Standard language and poetic language’ (1964), in Garvin, (1964), 17–30.Google Scholar
Ohmann, R. ‘Speech, action and style’ (1971), in Chatman, (1971), 241–54.Google Scholar
Ohmann, R. ‘Instrumental style: notes on the theory of speech as action’ (1972), in Kachru and Stahlke (1972), 115–41.Google Scholar
Ohmann, R. ‘Literature as act’ (1973), in Chatman, (1973), 81–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pride, J. B. and Holmes, J. (Eds.). Sociolinguistics (1972), London, Penguin.Google Scholar
Richards, I. A.Principles of Literary Criticism (1924), London, Routledge & Kegan Paul.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Searle, J.Speech Acts (1969), London, Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sebeok, T. A. (Ed.). Style in Language (1960), Cambridge, Mass., M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
Seuren, P. A. M. (Ed.). Semantic Syntax (1974), London, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Shklovsky, V. ‘Art as technique’ (1965; first published 1917), in Lemon and Reis (1965), 5–24.Google Scholar
Uspensky, B. A.A Poetics of Composition (1973), trans. Zavarin, V. and Wittig, S.Berkeley and Los Angeles, University of California Press.Google Scholar
Vološinov, V. N.Marxism and the Philosophy of Language (1973), Trans. Matejka, L. and Titunik, I. R.. New York, Seminar Press.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W. K. Jr. and M. C., Beardsley. ‘The intentional fallacy’ (1954), in Wimsatt, W. K. Jr., The Verbal Icon. Lexington, Ky., University of Kentucky Press.Google Scholar