1887
Volume 7, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2213-8722
  • E-ISSN: 2213-8730
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

The emphatic function of italics has largely been ignored by linguists despite the value its understanding clearly has for written discourse studies. This paper aims to fill this gap. It is inspired by the types of relationship between the degrees of communicative dynamism and the degrees of prosodic prominence which the theory of functional sentence perspective has established for spoken language and applies them to written communication. At the same time, it maintains the distinction between the two modes of communication and suggests that it is only through covert prosody that any real parallels may be sought. The study uses two versions of a small corpus of written fiction. In the first version the original emphatic italics are preserved. In this instance the author’s intended covert prosody is partially accessible to the reader. The second version is one from which emphatic italics were removed. In this case the reader can only rely on their own covert prosody for interpretation. The versions were analyzed separately, and the analyses were then compared. Three relational types between the plain and italicized versions are identified: typographically amplifying, typographically revaluating, and typographically disambiguating. The paper concludes by suggesting some further avenues of research.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/cogls.00062.luk
2020-10-01
2020-11-27
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Adam, M.
    (2009) Functional macrofield perspective: A religious discourse analysis based on FSP. Brno: Masaryk University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Anderson, R. C., Reynolds, R. E., Schallert, D. L., & Goetz, E. T.
    (1977) Frameworks for comprehending discourse. American Educational Research Journal, 14(4), 367–381. Retrieved fromhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/1162336
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bolinger, D. L.
    (1952) Linear modification. PMLA, 67(7), 1117–1144. Retrieved fromhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/459963
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Chafe, W. L.
    (1976) Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. InC. N. Li (Ed.) Subject and topic (pp.25–56). New York/London: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. (1988) Punctuation and the prosody of written language. Written Communication, 5(4), 396–426. 10.1177/0741088388005004001
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088388005004001 [Google Scholar]
  6. (1994) Discourse, consciousness, and time: The flow and displacement of conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Douglas, P.
    (2009) Encoding intonation: The use of italics and the challenges for translation. Corpus Linguistics conference, 5th Corpus Linguistics conference 2009, 20–23July 2009 University of Liverpool. Retrieved fromucrel.lancs.ac.uk/publications/cl2009/#papers
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Firbas, J.
    (1954) Anglická větná interpunkce: Pokus o její lingvistický výklad. Časopis pro moderní filologii, 36, 152–164.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. (1985) Thoughts on functional sentence perspective, intonation and emotiveness. Brno Studies in English, 16, 11–49. Retrieved fromhttps://digilib.phil.muni.cz/handle/11222.digilib/104482
    [Google Scholar]
  10. (1987) Thoughts on functional sentence perspective, intonation and emotiveness: Part two. Brno Studies in English, 17, 9–49. Retrieved fromhttps://digilib.phil.muni.cz/handle/11222.digilib/104166
    [Google Scholar]
  11. (1989) Degrees of communicative dynamism and degrees of prosodic prominence (weight). Brno Studies in English, 18, 21–66 (and10pp. of appendix). Retrieved fromhttps://digilib.phil.muni.cz/handle/11222.digilib/104234
    [Google Scholar]
  12. (1992) Functional sentence perspective in written and spoken communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511597817
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511597817 [Google Scholar]
  13. (1993) Can the functional perspective of a spoken sentence be predicted from that of its written counterpart?Brno Studies in English, 20, 23–49. Retrieved fromhttps://digilib.phil.muni.cz/handle/11222.digilib/104392
    [Google Scholar]
  14. (1995) Retrievability span in functional sentence perspective. Brno Studies in English, 21, 17–45. Retrieved fromhttps://digilib.phil.muni.cz/handle/11222.digilib/104106
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Fowler, H. W.
    (1965/1987) A dictionary of modern English usage (2nd ed., rev. byE. Gowers). Oxford/New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Givón, T.
    (2001) Syntax: A functional-typological introduction (Vol.II, 2nd ed.). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Hajičová, E., Partee, B., & Sgall, P.
    (1998) Topic-focus articulation, tripartite structures, and semantic content. Amsterdam: Kluwer. 10.1007/978‑94‑015‑9012‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9012-9 [Google Scholar]
  18. Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R.
    (1976) Cohesion in English. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. M. I. M.
    (2014) Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar (4th ed.). London/New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203783771
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203783771 [Google Scholar]
  20. Irving, J.
    (2013, 29May). Heiko Tietze posted this question to Mr. Irving [Facebook status update]. Retrieved fromhttps://www.facebook.com/JohnIrvingAuthor/posts/594381190585261
  21. Kalbertodt, J., Primus, B., & Schumacher, P. B.
    (2015) Punctuation, prosody and discourse: Afterthought vs. right dislocation. Frontiers in psychology, 6: 1803. doi:  10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01803
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01803 [Google Scholar]
  22. Klégr, A.
    (2009) “The Fifth element”: A remark on the FSP factors. Brno Studies in English, 35(2), 53–60. Retrieved fromhttps://digilib.phil.muni.cz/handle/11222.digilib/105144
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Lu, W.-L., & Verhagen, A.
    (2016) Shifting viewpoints: How does that actually work across languages? An exercise in parallel text analysis. InB. Dancygier, W.-L. Lu & A. Verhagen (Eds.), Viewpoint and the fabric of meaning. Form and use of viewpoint tools across languages and modalities (pp.169–190). Berlin/Boston: De Gruyter Mouton. 10.1515/9783110365467‑008
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110365467-008 [Google Scholar]
  24. Modern Language Association
    Modern Language Association (2016) MLA handbook (8th ed.). New York: The Modern Language Association of America.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Pratt, M. W., Krane, A. R., & Kendall, J. R.
    (1981) Triggering a schema: The role of italics and intonation in the interpretation of ambiguous discourse. American Educational Research Journal, 18(3), 303–315. Retrieved fromhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/1162664
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Quirk, R., Greenbaum, S., Leech, G., & Svartvik, J.
    (1985) A comprehensive grammar of the English language. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Saldanha, G.
    (2011) Emphatic italics in English translations: Stylistic failure or motivated stylistic resources?Meta, 56(2), 424–442. Retrieved fromhttps://id.erudit.org/iderudit/1006185ar
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Simpson, P.
    (2004) Stylistics. A resource book for students. London/New York: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203496589
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203496589 [Google Scholar]
  29. Stehlíková, L.
    (2016) Contextual disengagement in functional sentence perspective (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Masaryk University, Brno. Retrieved fromhttps://is.muni.cz/auth/th/sg6im
  30. Svoboda, A.
    (1968) The hierarchy of communicative units and fields as illustrated by English attributive constructions. Brno Studies in English, 7, 49–101.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. (1987) Functional perspective of the noun phrase. Brno Studies in English, 17, 61–86. Retrieved fromhttps://digilib.phil.muni.cz/handle/11222.digilib/104159
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Šlancarová, D.
    (1998) On the use of italics in English and Czech (Unpublished MA thesis). Masaryk University, Brno.
  33. Irving, J.
    (1999/2010) A widow for one year. London: Random House.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/cogls.00062.luk
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/cogls.00062.luk
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Chafe , covert prosody , emphasis , emphatic italics , Firbas , FSP and written and spoken communication
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error