On One Way of Marking Discourse Perspective in Lyric Poetry. Composition and Referential Links, or Where P. Hopper and S. Thompson are Wrong
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12775/LinCop.2015.011Keywords
lyric poetry, composition, foregrounding, backgroundingAbstract
The paper focuses on one of the devices serving to mark the foregrounded part of a lyric poem, which is the break of referential continuity. It is shown that in many instances the most salient part of the poem, corresponding to the discovery of some important truth or some other change in the author’s attitude towards the world, is constructed in such a way that its referential links to the preceding text are either interrupted or seriously weakened. The important implications which this fact has for the general theory of grounding are discussed at some length.
References
ЗЕЛЬДОВИЧ Г. М., 2015, О дискурсивной перспективе в лирической поэзии, В печати.
ЗЕЛЬДОВИЧ Г. М., 2016, Дискурсивная перспектива в лирическом тексте. Опыт жанровой грамматики, Рукопись.
СИЛЬМАН Т. И., 1977, Заметки о лирике, Ленинград: Советский писатель.
ТЮПА В. И., 2010, Драма как тип высказывания, Новый филологический вестник 14, N 3, c. 7–16.
ACKERMAN F., MOORE J., 2001, Proto-Properties and Grammatical Encoding: A Correspondence Theory of Argument Selection, Stanford CA: CSLI.
ARIEL M., 1988, Referring and accessibility, Journal of Linguistics 24, pp. 65–87.
ARIEL M., 2008, Pragmatics and Grammar, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
ASHER N., DENIS P., 2006, Names and Pops and Discourse Structure, in: Sidner C., Harpur J., Benz A., Kühnlein P. (eds.), Constraints on Discourse, Maynooth, pp. 11–18.
ASHER N., LASCARIDES A., 2003, Logics of Conversation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
BOLINGER D., 1979, Pronouns in discourse, in: T. Givón (ed.), Discourse and Syntax. Syntax and Semantics, 12, N.Y., etc., pp. 289–309.
CROFT W., 1991, Syntactic Categories and Grammatical Relations: The Cognitive Organization of Information, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
DOWTY D., 1991, Thematic proto-roles and argument selection, Language 67, pp. 547– 619.
ERTESCHIK-SHIR N., 2007, Information Structure, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
FLEISCHMAN S., 1990, Tense and Narrativity: From Medieval Performance to Modern Fiction, Austin: University of Texas Press.
GIVÓN T. (ed.), 1983, Topic Continuity in Discourse: A Quantitative Cross-Language Study, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
HOPPER P., 1979, Aspect and foregrounding in discourse, in: T. Givón (ed.), Discourse and Syntax. Syntax and Semantics, 12, N.Y., etc.: Academic Press, pp. 213–241.
HOPPER P., THOMPSON S., 1980, Transitivity in grammar and discourse, Language 56, pp. 251–299.
HOPPER P., THOMPSON S. (eds.), 1982, Studies in Transitivity. Syntax and Semantics, 15, N.Y., etc.: Academic Press.
LEECH G. N., 1969, A Linguistic Guide to English Poetry, London: Longman.
LEVIN B., RAPPAPORT HOVAV M., 2005, Argument Realization, Cambridge: Cam-bridge University Press.
MANIN D., 2012, The right word in the left place, Scientific Study of Literature 2, N 2, pp. 273–300.
MYHILL J., 1992, Word order and temporal sequencing, in: D. L. Payne (ed.). Prag-matics of Word Order Flexibility, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins, pp. 265–278.
NOFAL K. H., 2011, Syntactic aspects of poetry: A pragmatic perspective, International Journal of Business and Social Science 2, N 16, September 2011, pp. 47–63.
PAYNE D. L. (ed.), 1992, Pragmatics of Word Order Flexibility, Amster-dam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
PRINCE E., 1981, Toward a taxonomy of given-new information, in: Cole P. (ed.). Radical Pragmatics, N.Y.: Academic Press, pp. 223–256.
SHEN Y., 2007, Foregrounding in poetic discourse: between deviation and cognitive constraints, Language and Literature 16, N 2, pp. 169–181.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Stats
Number of views and downloads: 655
Number of citations: 0
