Stylistics routledge English Language Introductions

with
and
through
language, and in the raw materials out of which literary discourse is crafted.
As noted across the strand in A1, the tools of modern linguistics are drawn from the
full system of language and discourse, so it makes sense that those same tools be used
to see what writers do against this broader context. The aim is not to sequester off
into a special category significant aspects of literary style, but rather to look for the
origins of this style in the overall totality of discourse.
Following directly from this is a second point. If we describe this or that piece of
discourse as ‘literary language’, we immediately place a linguistic boundary around it.
In fact, to set down stylistic parameters around a form of discourse is in some respect
to codify it as a 
register
, thereby making it a language variety that regularly co-occurs
with a particular situation (see C2). But it is the very freedom of linguistic possibility
which is an index of creativity in language, not the presence of a fixed set of linguistic
guidelines within which a writer must work. To argue for the existence of a distinct
literary register is effectively to argue for a kind of cliché, because it would involve
reining stylistic expression into a restricted set of formulaic prescriptions.
98
E X P L O R A T I O N
C1

---

A third issue raised by the literary language debate is somewhat more ideological
than methodological in its general bearing. To claim that literary language is special,
that it can somehow be bracketed off from the mundane or commonplace in
discourse, is ultimately to wrest it away from the practice of stylistics. Followed
through, such a move assumes that whereas language scholars might be better
equipped to investigate forms of discourse like journalism or everyday conversation,
it should fall to the literary critic alone to deal with the special language of litera-
ture. As the critic F. W. Bateson notes (see unit D1), the rather mechanical procedure
of the stylistician is no match for the sensitivity of the critic.
I am reminded here of a curious episode which is germane to the present discus-
sion. Some years ago, I approached a publisher who held copyright on the work of
a well-known British poet. My request indicated the few lines of text required and
included a sample of the proposed stylistic exercise, part of which involved a cloze
test of the sort developed in B1. Not only was my request for permission refused
point blank, it was accompanied by the following rather sniffy rejoinder: ‘we cannot
possibly countenance such a travesty of lines as magical and special as these’. At the
risk of seeming to work out a personal angst in public, the relevance of the story is
that it shows precisely what can happen when the language which writers use is hived
off into a separate and indeed hallowed category. The ‘travesty’ (the stylistic analysis,
in other words!) was considered irreverent because it tried to lay bare the very
subtleties in expression the poet was conveying in language, yet to this self-appointed
guardian of literary probity, my methods had clearly violated something that was
deeply sacrosanct. It is worth noting that the injunction did not come from the 
poet himself – ironically, it is my experience that poets are often intrigued by what
stylisticians have to say about their style.
Probing ‘literary language’
This short sub-unit explores further the problematic issue of ‘literary language’. To
start us off, you will find below two-thirds of a poem. The name of its author, and
the reason why you have been given only two of its three stanzas will emerge later,
but as you read it through try to identify any features of textual construction, words
or phrases, that you feel are ‘literary’ or that you would normally associate with liter-
ature. Below the poem are some more detailed tasks which you can work through.
One Perfect Rose
A single flow’r he sent me, since we met.
All tenderly his messenger he chose;
Deep-hearted, pure, with scented dew still wet –
One perfect rose.
I knew the language of the floweret;
‘My fragile leaves,’ it said, ‘his heart enclose.’
Love long has taken for his amulet
One perfect rose.
11
111
11
111
I S T H E R E A ‘ L I T E R A R Y L A N G U A G E ’ ?
99