لخّصلي

Literary stylistics Linguistic analysis, in other words, can describe and analyse the language of a literary text but is not of itselfa n applied linguistic activity.It is not perhaps in itself applied linguistics as it involvesn opractical decision making, but itis, as we shall see, an important resource for the analysis of powerful and persuasive uses of language in general.An example, however, can be foundin the extract byRoger Fowler in Section .2 Stylistic analyses tend to highlight three related aspects o f literary language: its frequent deviation from the norms of more everyday language use; its patterning of linguistic units to create rhythms, rhymes, and parallel constructions; and the ways in which the form of the words chosen seems to augment o r intensify the meaning.I wanderthroughe a c h charter' dstreet Near wherethecharter'd Thamesdoesflow And mark in every face Imeet Marks ofweakness, marks of woe.It raises awareness, not only of the importance of exact wording but of how there is far more at stake in the use of language than the literal meaning of the words.Literary analysis, of its nature, cannot be brief if it is to do justice to its complex subject-matter and there is no space to go

into any detail here.All these features are present in the melancholyopening stanza of WilliamBlake's poem 'London'.It begins to move in that direction, however, when linguistic choices are linked to their effects upon the reader and some attempt is made at an explanation.This is the endeavour of literary stylistics.

Literary stylistics
Linguistic analysis, in other words, can describe and analyse the language of a literary text but is not of itselfa n applied linguistic activity. It begins to move in that direction, however, when linguistic choices are linked to their effects upon the reader and some attempt is made at an explanation. This is the endeavour of literary stylistics. It is not perhaps in itself applied linguistics as it
involvesn opractical decision making, but itis, as we shall see, an
important resource for the analysis of powerful and persuasive uses of language in general. It raises awareness, not only of the importance of exact wording but of how there is far more at stake in the use of language than the literal meaning of the words.Literary analysis, of its nature, cannot be brief if it is to do justice to its complex subject-matter and there is no space to go

into any detail here. An example, however, can be foundin the
extract byRoger Fowler in Section .2
Stylistic analyses tend to highlight three related aspects o f
literary language: its frequent deviation from the norms of more
everyday language use; its patterning of linguistic units to create
rhythms, rhymes, and parallel constructions; and the ways in
which the form of the words chosen seems to augment o r
intensify the meaning. All these features are present in the melancholyopening stanza of WilliamBlake's poem 'London'.
I wanderthroughe a c h charter' dstreet
Near wherethecharter'd Thamesdoesflow
And mark in every face Imeet
Marks ofweakness, marks of woe.
Here we have repetitions of words ('charter'd', 'mark'); of
sounds ('weakness', 'woe'; 'mark', 'meet); and of structures
('charter'd street', 'charter'd Thames'; "Marks of weakness,
marks of woe'). These establish aheavy tramping rhythm which
reflects the sentiment and subject-matter of the poem. The word
'charter'd', moreover, si used in an innovative and idiosyncratic
way, not to be precisely resolved by any dictionary definition a n d
thus lending itself to many interpretations--'mapped' perhaps,
or 'controlled by law'.
Such features of language use, frequently remarked upon in
stylistics, are by no means exclusive to literature. They
characterize other highly valued uses of language such as prayer,
song, and rhetoric which, like literature, can comfort and
strengthen; inspire and identify. More generally, if less nobly,
they and other similar devices occur in persuasive and emotive
uses of language in society at large, whether in commercial,
political, or interpersonal communication. As with l i t e r a t u r e ,
stylistic analysis can investigate the link between the forms of
these language uses and their social and psychological power. If
such analysis is thenused to address and uncover manipulation,
and to empower those who are being manipulated, then it does
indeed become part ofanapplied linguistic process.
Language and persuasion
Language can be used to tell the truth, whether it be literal truth o r the more general truths of poetry or (for believers) prayer. Yet it can also be used to distort facts, or to persuade people to take a particular stance towards them. Literary language partakes of this persuasive power, but si perceived asinspiring and uplifting. I tmanipulates our feelings and thoughts though in ways which wea r e willing, even eager, to accept. Other uses of language are less benign, seeking to control and influence our ideas in the service of some vested political or commercial interest. Yet there IS a sufficient degree of overlap for the techniques developed in the analysis of literary language to be extended to these other, more sinister, uses.
'In its most straightforward form this dark side of language use is lying: the statement of untrue facts which, unlike literary fiction, are calculated to deceive us about the real world. Lies, however, once uncovered, are simply rejected. But there are other more subtle ways of using language toinfluence and mislead. In our contemporary information society', the need both to understand and to combat such language uses has become particularly pressing. We are assailed at every turn by carefully crafted words seeking to attract our attention, win our support, change our behaviour. Corporations, advertisers, politicians, journalists, pressure groups, scientists, celebrities-even shop assistants and telephone operators speaking from learned scripts--are busy telling us, not only what they and their organizations do, but alsowhyi t is good for us and for the world in general. And as global communication grows, so does the number of opposed and contradictory voices. To make matters more complicated, it is very often impossible in many public discourses to pin down those responsible forwhatis said. There are many voices entangled in modern communication, each one, when questioned, passing on responsibility. Whois speak- ing, for example, in an advertisement? The corporation (and does that mean shareholders or management?), the agency (same question), the director, or the actors or models who appear in it? And which of these, fi any, actually believes the claims which are made? Almost everyone is speaking for someone else. In assuming
6 3
62

644
the persona of our job or organization, taking on the corporate voice, we become, in this respect, not only sinned against but sinning! This, too, is an area where techniques developedi n literary analysis can be brought to bear. A multiplicity of voices is afeature ofmany literary works, especially novelsand drama.
These are increasingly urgent issues, and applied linguistics. should contribute to an understanding of them. This is not only because, as in the case ofliterary stylistics, the power of words i s intrinsically interesting. It israther that, both for individuals a n d for organizations, there are decisions to be made, often with far- reaching consequences for health, well-being, an
d prosperity. These decisions will depend in part
upon t
he
c
apaci
ty
to see through the way language is being used to the facts and intentions which it realizes. How should we interpret what we read in the mission statement, the 'scientific report, or the food label? To what degree should we believe what we hear on the news, or from our politicians' mouths? Which side should w e take when there are disagreements, over the effects of new: technology on health and the environment for example, or t h e rival claims of two sides in a military conflict? Understanding linguistic techniques of persuasion can enhance our ability to! make the rational informed judgements on which decision making depends. It is here that applied linguistics has aparticular contribution to make, and here that some of the skills developed in literary stylistics can be extended to very powerful effect.
the writer and the view of the world which he or she wishes to encourage in their reader.
T h e s e matters, however, are already apparent to the perceptive reader with or without any specialized knowledge of language. Of more interestt o applied linguists, and of more danger for being less transparent, is the presentation of the same facts in ways which, whilenot altering the truth of what si said, nevertheless influence, and are perhapscalculated to influence, the reader's attitude. Thus just as a glass might be described as 'half full' or 'half empty' with rather different implications, so the same food item can be truthfully described as either '90% fat-free' or '10% fat. Both a re equally true, but t
oac onsume r bent up on r educing their calorie Intake the former description seems more attractive. As in a literary text, the wording is al. 'What's done si done' says the confident Lady Macbeth after the play's opening scenes; 'What's done cannot be undone' is her remorseful lament at the end. The literal meaning is the same, but the effect is very different. It is in precise analysis of such detail that a real contribution can be made t o people's capacity to read and listen critically, and to resist being manipulated by what is said. The analysis of such language and its effects is known as critical linguistics, or, when placed in a larger social context and seen as part of a process of social change, as Critical Discourse Analysis (DA). # One area of interest is the many ways in which language merges opinion with fact. The most obvious is apparently descriptive vocabulary which incorporates a judgement, for example, 'regime' for 'government', 'terrorist' for 'combatant', 'murder' for 'killing'. The point here is not that the judgement itself is necessarily wrong but that there is no separation of fact and
opinion. More subtle choices of vocabulary include reference to some countries by name and others by their inhabitants, for example, 'Spain has complained to the Russians' in a BBC news headline, or the introduction of 'we and 'our' to mean 'the people of this country', with the alarming implication thatthe news is for insiders only. Grammatical devices, as well as vocabulary, can achieve similar effects. 'Fears are rising that ...' fails to say who is afraid, suggesting this is how the news writer thin
ks
people oughtt
o r feel ather than how they actually dofeel. - 'The President threatened to suppress opposition' interprets the
65
Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA)
There is, of course, in any communication aninevitable selection
and omission of information. Newspaper editors must choose
which events to cover, how much space to devote to each, and
which facts to emphasize or omit. Thus a tabloid paper might
decide to cover a celebrity divorce as afront page story while a
broadsheet might give more space to an economic forecast,
omittingthe celebrity divorce or mentioning it only in the briefest
possible terms. Itis not that the process of selection and omission
is wrong in itself. One cannot report a o
any event or situ e
however truthfully, without selecting some facts in ti n,
preferenc to
others. But the selection, equally inevitably, reflects the values of

6 6
President's words for us rather than, by quoting them, allowing
us ot make our own judgement.
A further area of interest, less evident without linguistic
analysis, is persistent patterns of grammatical choice. There a r e ,
for example,constructions which allow a speaker or writer not
to mention the agent (i.e. the person responsible for something)
Two strategies in particular allow this to happen. One
passivization, the favouring ofpassive constructions over active
ones, forexample, 'Fivechildren were killed in thea i r attack'n o t
'The pilots killed five children'. The other is nominalization, w h e n
actions and processes are referred to by nouns as though they
rather than the people doingthem, were the agent, for example,
"Geneticmodificationis a powerful technique rather than
'Researchers whomodify genes have agreat deal ofpower'. Both
nominalization and passivization can make an action seem both
inevitable and impersonal, for example, Redundancies will be
announced' rather than 'Theowners will be firing people'.
It is by no means only in overtly political matters that the
techniquesof CDA can be brought ot bear. An areaincreasingly
affecting all our lives is the communication of new scientific
research and its technological applications in areas such a s
medicine, food production, and information technology. Non-
specialists legitimately wish to make informed decisions about the
impact of this research on individual lives, social developments,
andt h e environment. They are also aware of vestedcommercial
and political interests in particular lines of research, and a!
consequent blurring of the traditional lines between objective
scientific and commercial persuasive discourse. Science h a s
becom poli
e tical. In this situation there is a pressing need to
develop awareness of how language is used ni the presentation o f
technical information. This is an applied linguistic issue in which
CDA has a particularlyimpo
rtantrole to play.
This situationoispart of alarger phenomenon in which specialists
whose work
is f
great social importance are
confronted with
t h e
need to communicate their specialized knowledge to the outside
world. There is a tendency, when doing this, to move in two
opposite directions: one towards obfus
cation and the other|
towards a false clarity.
Obfuscation si the failure to speak as plainly and straight- forwardly as possible. In addition to the language of applied 6 7 science, that of the law and bureaucracy are often cited as examples. In their defence, it is often argued that clarity should besacrificed toexactitude. The scientist must be true to the facts; the lawyer must foresee every possible loophole. On the other hand, it may be that language is being used as a screen and its obscurity functioning to guard the specialists' territories and vested interests from democratic scrutiny. In these cases, what the critical discourse analyst must do is investigate whether in a particular instance there would be loss if more straightforward language were used. Similar arguments pertain to al specialized professional discourse. It is exceedingly difficult in this area to distinguishnecessary complexity of expression from unnecessary disguise of information and the use of specialized language to overawe and intimidate. described by the critical discourse analyst Norman Fairclough as conve T h e other tendency has been rsationalization and the creation of synthetic personality. This is the tendency for communication, howevercomplex orsignificant or however unequal theencounter, to be presented in the register of casual conversation, as though the relationship between the participants were equal and intimate. This presentsthe opposite danger from obfuscation, for it may make matters simple and imprecise which need more attention. It also fails to mark in anyw a y those areas of human intercourse, suchas the law and scientific enquiry, which legitimately demand both indicators of their power and greater attention to detail.
T here is, however, a potential problem with CDA analyses which has been noted by several appliedlinguists. This is that they risk attributing too much intentionality t o the writer and
to
o
much passivity to the reader.Most texts are both constructed and interpreted inmany different ways. Although there may be cas
es where choices are made deliberately, the process of composition si often likely to be amore hasty and ad hoc affair, determined by conventions and many other factors. Readings, too,
are diverse. Some are well-informed and careful, already aware of bias; others are casual, unlikely to be swayed by one precise choice ofwords or another. There is, in short, a danger of

06
68
assuming that interpretation of a
text is wholly determined b y hte language used
These are difficult matters, but they are areas of language use which affecteveryone, and itis impossible tounderestimate their potential effect upon our individual lives. In a competitive and dangerous world, being able to understand and to assess the information we receive and the motives and interests of those who are giving it to us is ofessential importance. This is part of knowing a language and one on which- -quite literally--our futures depend. Inevitably, there are pitfalls in CDA as there must be in any enterprise which touches upon, and seeks to intervene in, matters of great personal and social significance. It may e n d up presuming to speak for people rather than informing the way in which they speak for themselves, and it may develop a n obfuscatory jargon of its own. As in other controversial a n d sensitive areas of enquiry the applied linguist, when drawing upon CDA, must struggle to achieve a delicate balance. But t h e alternative is not to engage at all, which undermines the rationale for applied linguistics as awhole. Dealing with and understanding the persuasive and manipulative use of language si a major need in the contemporary world. Being able to do this effectively is essential to us all.