- •Functional analysis of a text
- •2. The Model of Functional Analysis of a Text Table 1
- •3.1 Model Description: The Informative Function
- •3.2.Text to demonstrate how functions work:
- •3.3. Free interpretation and sharing stage:
- •3.4. Systematization of realia:
- •3.5. Allusions, intertextuality
- •3.6. Linguistic Information
- •3.6.1. Sound Level
- •3.6.2. Word Level
- •3. 6.3. Sentence and Text Levels
- •3.7. Preliminary Conclusion
- •4.The communicative function
- •4.1. Communicative triangle
- •4.2.1. Genre Properties: theoretical background
- •4.2. The Markers of the Communicative Function and Communicative Properties of the text from “Ulysses”
- •4.3. Chronotopal triangle
- •4.4. Chronotopal relations in the passage from “Ulysses”
- •4.5. Conclusion:
- •5. The emotive function of the text
- •5.1. Theoretic background
- •5.2. The Markers of the Emotive Function in the Passage from “Ulysses”
- •5.3. Conclusion
- •6. The aesthetic function of the text
- •6.1. Theoretical background
- •6.1.1. Subjective Essence of the Category of the Beautiful
- •6.1.2. Objective Essence of the Category of the Beautiful
- •6.2. The Contents and the Markers of the Aesthetic Function in the mfat
- •6.2.1. Integrity
- •6.2.2. Harmony:
- •6.2.3. Clarity
- •7.Conclusion
5.2. The Markers of the Emotive Function in the Passage from “Ulysses”
The same “poetic” quality is characteristic for the emotive function in the passage from “Ulysses”. It is marked by sound parallelism (Id love to have the whole place swimming in roses, from rising tomorrow, etc), by grammatical parallelism (the repetition of participial phrases), by the repetition of polysemantic exclamations that perform the role of punctuation marks. Lexemes of assessment (howling, pleasure, poor devil, handsome) that render the attitude of the heroine to the events and people can also be considered as direct markers of the emotive function. We have also mentioned above a polysemantic character of a single metaphor in the passage.
QUESTIONS AND ASSIGNMENTS:
5.3. Conclusion
Yet, however, this function, being rich in textual markers, is a paradoxical one. It is impossible having the text as a single source of analysis to define the level of its impact upon the reader. We can only identify the means of impact that are consciously or subconsciously employed by the author. Actually we face the same old problem of the revelation of the category of the reader in the text, i.e. the major aporia of the communicative function.
QUESTIONS AND ASSIGNMENTS:
6. The aesthetic function of the text
6.1. Theoretical background
6.1.1. Subjective Essence of the Category of the Beautiful
To comprehend the contents of this function let us consider a number of aesthetic and philosophic assumptions that received a full coverage in A.F.Losev’s works on the history of aesthetics. As we scrutinize James Joyce’s text it would also be reasonable to attract Joycean “notes on aesthetics” (1904). As their starting point both Joyce and Losev while developing their own views upon the category of the beautiful took Aquinas’ "Synopsis Philosophicae Scholasticae", where the philosopher of the Proto–Renaissance (12th century) reasoned on the nature of intellection and apprehension. Aquinas insisted that according to its nature the category of the beautiful is interlinked with apperception or with cognitive activity. He singled out the physical ability to see and the ability to hear as the abilities predetermining both cognitive activity and the perception of the beautiful. Aquinas formulated his concept of the beautiful as follows: "Pulchra sunt quae visa placent" (Everything that is pleasant to see is beautiful)[1a,g 5a 4ad; цит. по: Лосев, 1978: 151].
Unlike Aquinas, Joyce, being weak-sighted, did not consider the ability to see to be dominant in the apperception of the beautiful. He added two more formulas to the Aquina’s:
Everything is beautiful that is pleasant to hear.
Everything is beautiful that arrests the feeling) [James Joyce. The Critical Writings, 1959: 145].
These three formulas reflect the subjective essence of the category of the beautiful. Therefore they cannot provide objective textual markers of the aesthetic function. Usually this formulas work when a student is asked to interpret freely and starts her/his interpretation in the following way: I like (dislike) this text because… and speaks of her/ his own impressions, preferences and dislikes. Such sort of interpretation usually rests upon aesthetic preferences of the period, a student’s cultural and educational levels and her/his sense of beauty.
QUESTIONS AND ASSIGNMENTS: