Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Widdowson
Stylistics is linguistics analysis of text. When we say text what do we mean by that?
Which text? Here text may include a poem and when we go for literature
analysis linguistically we treat literature as text. When we focus on literary
criticism of literature then we treat literature as discourse. But combination of both
literature as text and literature as discourse is what stylistic does. Many writer
believes stylistics as discipline but Widdowson believes that stylistics is neither a
discipline nor the subject but lies somewhere in between; it is like meditation
between discipline and subject. It related discipline with subject like language
with linguistics and literature with literary criticism. For instance he says; “I want to
define discipline as set of abilities; concepts; ways of thinking associated
with a particular area of which one inquires, geneticists, biochemist,
linguist, and literary critics, for example all follow certain principles of
inquiry which characterizes different discipline” meaning Genetic,
Biochemistry, they all are different discipline what are subjects then? Subject is that
from which it is derived like subject is derived from discipline; discipline provides
material from which subjects are derived, because discipline is a broader term.
English language is subject; you’re reading different subject in your school, English
language, Math, Science; science includes chemistry, biology, and physics but as you
go on subject will go on move towards discipline. You talk something general then
you go to specify it. “By stylistics I mean the study of literary discourse from
a linguistics orientation and I shall take the view that what distinguishes
stylistics from literary criticism on the one hand and linguistics on the
other hand is that it is essentially a means of linking the two and has (as
yet at least) no autonomous domain of its own.” “Stylistics, however
involves both literary criticism and linguistics, as its morphological make-
up suggests; the ‘style’ component relating it to the former and the ‘istics’
component to the latter.”
Haliday defines stylistics as “the linguistics analysis of literary text” according
to him stylistician can comprehend literary text through a comprehension of their
language structure. Literary text is seen to consist of patterns and properties which
are part of language. Those patterns of language can be at level of:
a) Arrangement of graphic and phonic symbols
b) The lexico-grammatical patterns
c) The semantic or pragmatic patterns
The goal of stylistic is to show why and how the text means linguistically. Language
is subject and linguistics is its discipline same as literature is a subject and literary
criticism is its discipline. Discipline is studied to understand the subject. Stylistic is
neither a subject nor a discipline but it tells relation between them.
Disciplines: linguistics literary criticism
Stylistics
For Example: a painting to a learner is nothing but use of colors but a critic may find
a hidden message behind that painting. Further when a non-verbal message is
written into a verbal message it further gives forms to understand this is possible
through literary criticism. Primarily critic concerned is with message of a literary
piece which a writer wants to convey. Linguist direct attention to how language is
used in the piece of literary text.
Chapter-2 LITERATURE AS TEXT
Literature has attracted the attention of linguist for two very opposite reasons.
One is that linguistic description of a literary text sometimes gives sense and
secondly it does not give sense sometimes.
Hadliday analyzes Yeat’s Poem “Leda and Swan” how two parts of the system of
English are exemplified one nominal group and other verbal group.
3) Homophoric: when head words explain themselves and when they do not
need any reference they are called Homophoric references, for example ‘the
sun’ ‘the moon’ the president’ etc.
If a nominal group has either a modifier or a qualifier then the group fall into the
category of Cataphoric
First criteria have to do with linguistics form and second with communicative
function, and relationship between them is considerably important. In Leda and
Swan there are 25 nominal groups and 10 contain definite article with modifier
or qualifier, this is a simple text analysis of the poem. Those 10 groups must be
counted as Cataphoric nominal group because of having modifier and qualifier
but they do not operate functional criteria of a Cataphoric reference. For
example; “the great wings” and “beating still” “the dark webs” in forms are
Cataphoric reference but wings are not identified as kind of
wings which are great and beating, and nor the webs that are dark, so
respect to their function they are either anaphoric or Homophoric reference.
So ‘the dark web’ and ‘the great wings’ and ‘staggering girl’ are identified
as anaphoric reference to the title of the poem. So these references ‘dark webs’
‘great wings’ as bodily parts are anaphoric reference to the Swan and
‘Staggering girl” identified +human +female to the Leda to the title of the
poem as anaphoric reference.
Me up at does
Quietly stare
A poisoned mouse
Is asking what
This poem is like an ungrammatical long sentences but it still gives a meaning
that mouse that is poisoned talking; since such a sentence is interpretable so
grammar should be of such a principle that can generate such kind of sentences.
These deviations in literature do not occur randomly but literary writers often
patterns to violate the grammatical rules but they still give sense in literary
language.
“The yellow fog that rubbing its muzzle” (Eliot) in this sentence the ‘fog’ is
given +animate because fog has no muzzle perhaps an animal can do that. For
instance “The Thistle saw the gardener” and “winds stampeding
the fields” here in these sentences thistle and winds are given +human quality.
1) Addition: when a word is not required and the writer add it for certain effect
this is called addition.
for example: “and mas in myrth like ‘to’ a comedy” in the poem by
Spenser underlined ‘to’ is added by the writer though it is un-required. In other
example. Maria was coming at home, Maria has a god with her, Maria was
coming very slowly. Here Maria can be addition and can be removed.
2) Deletion: when a word is required but the writer deletes it for certain
effects. This is deletion.
3) Substitution: when the writer instead of using ‘she’ word uses another
word this would be substitution. For example: ‘blank day, bald street’ rather
than empty street.
4) Reordering: when the writer changes the order of the words in a sentence
for instance ‘No loyal knight and true’ instead of ‘No loyal and true knight’.
Deviations are used deliberately by the poets to beautify the literary work;
literary writer is allowed to make such deviance as contrast to a speaker. The
result is some degree to surprise the reader and to get reader’s attention.
It is hard to find out the degree of deviations in any rule. The problem of the
relationship between grammatical and interpretability is that even
ungrammatical sentences are interpretable.
Halliday believes that literary text (in which rules are violated) can be accounted
for in term of models of linguistic description while generative grammarians
disagree.
Chapter-03 Literature as Discourse
Discourse in form of lecture or conversation, group discussion between two or
more people represents speaker’s knowledge but not in literature. In literature
ungrammatical language makes sense and can be interpreted through its code
and context.
Sometimes linguistic analysis may not give you the comprehensive meaning
then literary criticism may help it out to comprehend it. Deviations in literature
are not random but they are patterns. And deviations cannot be understood in
isolation but partly understood by linguistics (grammar rules etc.) and partly by
context, in which they appeared, so that means literature can only be
understood as whole We understand a language through its code which
is grammatical structure; unless we know the grammar we cannot understand
a language. In the same way every piece of literature has a
different code of its language, through some rules we derive a code out of
literary text and we apply that code to analyze whole literary piece.
“Anyone” is used as proper noun and auxiliaries “didn’t” and “did” are treated
as common noun in reference to “anyone” in the poem. It is because he talks
‘anyone’ in general who lives in that very town. These deviations may lead
us to the interpretation that writer’s past life is consisted of enjoyment.
In the code it does not happen all that time that all natural objects are
given +animate and +human features but sometimes they present as they
are, For example: “Winds stampeding the fields” “The blunt wind that
dented the balls of my eyes” (By Ted Hughes).
In this poem the poet wishes to express violent animacy of wind that house
taken on roots and windows come alive. We may say that winds in the poem
is animate but inanimate in general phenomena, and poet can’t simply
ignore literal meaning and bring an entire new meaning of the word. For
example a word may give different meaning in a context but in the same
poem it retains its original characteristics as well. E.g. in Browning’s poem
“The Sullen wind was soon awaken/ It tore the elm-tops down for spite”
since the ‘Wind’ is taken as +human as it awakens, but at the same time it
retains its inanimate characteristics as in next line “it tore elm-tops” use of ‘it’;
which is a pronoun used for both animate and inanimate.
It is clear now that making rules cannot give whole meaning; but they are still
English words and forms a part of language system, for instance, ‘anyone’ is a
common noun also an indefinite noun. Similarly ‘did’ is a common noun in the
code of the poem which is verb +past +activity.
It is clear now that literary text does not depend on reader’s knowledge or code
as they are common. In short neither standard grammar nor devised code can
work as whole for the meaning of a poem. It is suggested that an interpretation
of a literary work as piece of discourse involves correlating of linguistics item
and then context or background where it occurs.
Significance VS Values
1) Phonological Patterning
“On the bald streets breaks the black day” in this line phonological pattern
is used (alliteration) /b/ sound is repeated to make rhyme scheme which shows
desolation of the poet, through alliteration mood of the poet is conveyed.
This is an example of alliteration. The sound stanzas and scandals are the poet’s
deliberate selections. The sound effect created by such selection gives the
reader a deeper sense of understanding the enormity of corruption and
insincerity in the Nigerian society. It is the insincerity of the rulers that ‘cause’
the masses to ‘curse’.
2) Semantic Patterning
“The way a crow/stuck down on me/ the dust of snow/ from a hemlock
tree” through these lines death and desolation is presented for example Crow
represents black and black is dark and evil. Hemlock is associated with poisoned
tree, and dust of snow associated with Christian funeral ceremony “dust to dust”
so through these meanings successfully conveyed theme of death in the poem.
3) Syntactic patterning
Through structure of the poem writer has conveyed his message for example
synonyms and antonyms are used, youth=old, love friend. Young=old,
fair=purpose, through these we can interpret that fairness is associate with
youth and the art is associated with old age. Look at this sentence: “He went
home”. The pattern of the sentence is SPA (S – Subject, P = Predicator, A –
Adjunct). A poet can violate the order of the above sentence in the form below:
“Home he went” (This has ASP pattern). The item “home” occurs in the initial
position of the sentence to foreground it. This is deviation for a specific effect.
CHAPTER-4 THE NATURE OF LITERARY
COMMUNICATION
Although the deviations are common in literature but these are not defining
features of literature. But literary language should be patterns into actual
language system. Widdowson suggests that effect of patterning is to
create acts of communication which are self-contained
units, independent of social context and expressive of reality other than that
which is authorized by conventions. In other words, literature should not be
deviant as text it must of its nature be deviant as discourse.
Grammatical sender and addresser is first person and receiver and addressee
second person. E.g. I/We, and You and a third person who is being talked about
she/he etc. But in literary communication it may not happen.
E.g I’m the enemy you killed my friend : a dead person is addressing,
according to code of language the third person is addressing, in the context of
poem, being first person, so third person is used as first person.
I come from haunts of coot and hern (reference to brook or stream is saying
I come from).
These examples do not fulfill requirements eg. A dead person speaking which
does not happen in real world, a dead person can be talked of as third person,
and other requirement of addresser is that he should be human. In these
examples senders are poets Shelley, Owen, Tennyson and Mac Neice but
the addressers are dead person, unborn child, stream and clouds; which
in normal communication are being talked as third person.
First person pronoun in these extracts then is not the conventional one but is
somehow compounded with the third person to create a unique kind of
reference.
let us now consider how third person is used in literary communication, Fear
took hold of him. Gripping tightly to the lamp, he reeled, and looked
round.
The water was carrying his feet away, he was dizzy.......In his soul, he
knew he would fall.(D.H Lawrence ‘The Rainbow’)
drowning man which is only felt by the person himself can feel. And this cannot
be predicted for third person except in reported speech.What goes in mind can
be only described by first person for instance In my soul, I know I would
fall etc. but of course neither first person nor third person suits the situation
because man is not presented as ghost speaking from his grave, but a drowning,
which can’t speak. In the extract we have effect of third person which takes
value of both first and third person.
The literary message does not arise in the normal course of social activity as do
other messages, it arises from no previous situation and requires no
response, and it does not serve as a link between people or as a means
of furthering the business of ordinary social life. We might represent the
normal communication situation as follows:
I III II
Sender Receiver
Addresser Addressee
Literary communication:
I/III II/III
i) First, pronouns in English can refer to more than one person (I+III) “My
wife has a train to catch so we must leave at once” or “Your train leave
at 10 so we must leave at once”. ‘We’ may also include speaker and
hearer (I+II). ‘You’ II+II , I+III, I+II multiple references when someone is
not directly addressed.
Resolution:
Answer to this objection is that singular pronouns which in the code can
only have single reference but which in literary writing has what we might call
compound references. This might formulate I/III, II/II, III/I.
ii) Second, that the way Widdowson has compounded pronouns, as first person
pronoun in poetry refers to poet who is sender and addresser, does not follow
that all literature makes use of pronouns in same way.
Resolution:
This objection can be answered that in literary writing even if first and
second person pronouns do not refer to entities which cannot of their
nature send and receive messages, they do even so depend for their value on
the ending of the sender/addresser and receiver/addressee amalgams and on
the addition of a third person feature.
The literary writer is well aware that artistic convention within which he works
allows for this distinction between sender and addresser and so relieves him
from any social responsibility for what he says in the first person. This is how
literary writing differs from diaries and personal letters.
iii) Third, object that writer mostly does have social purpose of writing.
Resolution:
Most literature provokes no social action whatever. Shelly spoke of poets as ‘the
unknowledgeable legislator of the world’, but a legislator who is not
acknowledged is not a legislator; poets do not make laws, although they make
directly influence those that do. Literary discourse is independent of normal
interaction, has no links with any preceding discourse and anticipates no
following activity either verbal or otherwise.
Reformulation of the Principles: (Literature combines what is separate
in code)
It is because a literary work is dissociated from other social interaction that the
writer is required to work the language into patters: patters are designed sell f-
contained and they are comparatively different from conventional language
code.
The problem is that we don’t know what to understand from the preceding text
of present or past, ‘the wind is billowing’ or ‘the wind was billowing’, poem
has no specific time reference. We’ve aspect (ing) but not tense(is/was), in
language code time and tense are interrelated one can’t have without
another; present continuous and present perfect tense, so including aspect as
feature of general category tense. But in this poem what is normally inseparable
becomes separated: we have aspect without tense.
Literary writing often follows strategy as; it combines what is kept separate
in the code and separate what is combined in the code. For instance, a
lexical item (wind) can combine the feature /-human which is part of
signification with the feature of /+human which context imposes upon it (winds
stampeding the fields), and the entity refers to both human and non-human
at the same time. And this is inseparable in the reality.
In ordinary conversation sender and addresser are same and receiver and
addressee are the same. In literary sender is poet and addresser is character in
the poem so they differ from each other (I am the enemy you killed my
friend) (Ewen).
In the poem the writer addresses objects in this way they become addressee but
reader of the poem are human being so they are the receiver so addressee and
receiver are different (Thou still unravish’d bride of quietness) (Keats).
The second does not have the same value as the first; there is not the same
degree of ‘convergence’ of double structure.
For instance: sound /p/ in pet, pat, pack are represented by –et, -at,
and –ack in contexts; it is in syntagmatic relationship with these
sounds. Sound /b/ in contexts to produce bet, bat, and back. /p/ and
/b/, in the contexts –et, -at, -ack- and in result are in paradigmatic
relationship with each other.
Paradigmatic describes substitution relationship for example in a sentence like
‘The plumber smiled’ NP (The Plumber) VP (smiled) each word can be
exchanged with other words like My Aunt Charlotte/ An old man without
changing syntagmatic relationship. Importance of paradigmatic
relationship is that it is one of criteria in the classification of words into
various categories such as noun, verb, pronoun, etc. items which can
substitute for (smiled) will be verbs. Similarly VP can be
replaced Complained, Arrived etc, Mended the pipes, installed. We can set
up class of transitive verbs which all are verbs having not following NP as part of
their grammatical environment, for instance some noun cannot occur with
intransitive verbs like the plumber mended.
Horizontal plane are syntagmatically related and those on the vertical place are
paradigmatically related. For instance: The Nurse Teacher disappeared objected
Arthur Harold Wilson shot ridiculed a man from the BBC The Archbishop of
Canterbury. Thus the nurse and teacher are equal but notnurse and Harold.
Again disappeared andobjected are equivalent but they are not equivalent
to shot and ridiculed but only to‘shot a man from the BBC’ or
Eliot combines all choices so that the linguistic elements become equivalent in
combination as well as in selection and paradigmatic; and syntagmatic relations
were neutralized in this context.
If we move from left to right selecting from each column we can construct a
whole series of different sentences:
I have felt sense sublime of something that impels all objects of all
thought.
I felt a spirit far more deeply inter fused.
I have felt a spirit that disturbs me with the joy of elevated thoughts.
Wordsworth uses syntactic and semantic equivalences which create the effect
that poet trying to express the unspeakable; trying to capture a true
experience.
Let’s now briefly review the converse: aspect of literary discourse which
depends on dividing what is normally compounded. The most obvious instance of
this, of course, is the separation of addresser from sender and addressee
from receiver. It is to be noticed that this separation is suggestive of the
independence of literary discourse from the normal processes of social
interaction and that it is because of this independence that internal patterns of
language have to be designed within the discourse to carry meanings. These
patterns are formed by reversing the normal principles of linguistic
organization. Thus, the dividing of what is combined leads to the combining of
what is divided: the one is consequence of other. The isolation of aspect from
tense is the result of removing the discourse from any contact with
previous interaction, but the consequence of this is that the occurrence of the
continuous form of the verb cannot itself be isolated in the context: it has
to pattern in with others. The first line of the poem: The wind billowing out
the seat of my britches…” make no sense on its own ( as it would if it were
the reply of the question or if it were linked with previous discourse In any other
way). It only makes sense in association with the other lines of the poem, as
part of code patterns prepares the way for the creation of patterns in context.
Other examples are provided by such opening lines as; “No, no, go not to
Lethe, neither twist/ Wolf’s bane, tight-rooted, for its poisonous wine”
(keats) and “yes, I remember Adlestrop” (Edward Thomas). These lines
make o sense on their own. They only make sense in association with the rest
of the poem which they appear; being cut off from one link they have to form
others.
These quotations sound like spoken replies, one catches the cadence of the
speaking voice; but at the same time lines are in medium ofwritten form.
Organization of first lines of poems suggests mode of communicating. The
medium used in literature is not like that of conventionally associated but it is
more like of spoken.
For example: the patterning of sound and stress upon which poetic
meanings so often depend are obviously intended to appeal to the ear,
and in this respect poetry has character of communication in the spoken
mode. The medium is writing, but the mode of communication is not definitely
spoken or written in the conventional sense but a blend of both. Literature also
has blend of both for instance; if we look at certain features of short stories,
appears to be mode of communicating which has no analogue in conventional
uses of language. It is very common to find literary works beginning with a third
person pronoun for which there is no previous reference. In normal
circumstances, if one uses ‘he’ or ‘she’ it is anaphoric or deictic reference and
refers to human; however this is not normally case in the literature for
example: “she walks in beauty like the night…(Byron), She was a
phantom of delight… (Wordsworth). Here ‘she’ is not told about so here
‘she’ pronoun takes place of proper noun and it never happens in normal
discourse. For instance in Fiction its often found “He came back into the
kitchen. The man was still on the floor, lying where he had hit him, and
his face was bloody…” (Somerset Maugham :The Unconquerred). And “
Soon they enter the Delta. The sensation was familiar to him” (William
Faulker: Delta Autumn) and “it was an eighty-cow dairy and the troop of
milkers, regular and supernumerary, were all at work. (Hard; The
withered Arm). Since there is no preceding discourse to which these
sentences can relate, the above used pronouns have no references and reader
takes it as it were, on trust. So the literary discourse and common discourse
differs; whereas ordinary discourse pronoun derive their value
retrospectively and in literary discourse pronoun take their
value prospectively from what follows. It frequently happens that in literary
discourse person pronouns are not anaphoric in function but operate as
Homophoric or deictic as in the case of the lines from Byron and Wordsworth or
Cataphoric in the case short story opening. Since “the man was still on the
floor” is a Cataphoric reference followed by article; in effect inclines us to
interpret these definite noun phrases deictically. The effect of use of phrase
like ‘The man’ without any given information; draw the reader into the
imagined situation and to provide an immediacy of reference by involving the
reader as participant in the situation itself. The purpose of throwing the
reference forward, of projecting the reader’s attention towards what is to come,
is of course precisely to make us read on.
The account of person and settings is not, however, a straightforward one (as,
indeed we might not expect it to be). As the situation is one which is removed
from the reality of normal social life there is no need to keep the different
situational factors distinct. Again see the combing principal at work. Thus, it is
common to find it instead of having persons, times and places described as
separate aspect of situation they are interrelated as features of a kind of
composite reality which we usually refer to as the ‘theme’. Consider again
following example, the opening of Lawrence’s story Fanny and Annie:
Flame-lurid his face as he turned among the throng of flame-lit and dark
faces upon the platform. In the light of the furnace she aught sight of
his drifting countenance, like a piece of floating fire. And the nostalgia,
the doom of homecoming, when through her veins like a drug. His
eternal face, flame-lit now. The pulse and darkness of red fire from the
furnace towers in the sky, lighting the desultory, industrial of crowd on
the wayside station, lit him and went out...Of course he did not see her.
Flame-lit and un seeding!....”
Scene here, the darkness and the red light from the furnace is inextricably
involved with the man’s appearance. This kind of description of person and
setting which is required in literary discourse has no exact analogue in other
uses of language. What literature communicates, then, is an individual
awareness of a reality other than that which is given general social sanction but
nevertheless related to it. The basic problem in the teaching of literature is to
develop in the student an awareness of the what/how of literary communication
and this can be only be done by relating it to, without translating it into, normal
uses of language. it is at this point that we can turn to pedagogic questions.
Chapter 5 Literature as Subject and discipline
Different between subject and discipline is that disciplines are derived from the
subject like you’ve studied literary criticism, linguistics or literature. So here he
discusses that how literature is to be taught as subject because we do teach in
literature as subject not only in Pakistan but in English countries.
But here is no proper framework as such for teaching English literature;
what he says that teachers more or less teach literature to the student as
the same way as they were taught. This stylistic that we’ve been discussing
and we’ve know how important this stylistic is, and within stylistic how
important the role of language is in understanding literature. Language
aspect, linguistics aspect and the linguistic analysis it guides to towards
the understanding of literature.
When you ignore the importance of language you just focus on critical aspect of
literature then you’re deriving the students of literature of very important
thing in order to understand literature language has to be given due
importance because as we see language is very important and there is no well
defined rules for teaching English literature that according to stylistics this is
how you teach the literature, take your example how you’re taught literature
teacher reading out the poem and teacher explaining the main points what a
writer wants to convey may be telling you about rhyme scheme at the most but
guiding to you towards message this is what poet is saying.
But what happens when you’re taught literature you’re taking the
message that teacher is delivering to you not the poem that is
delivering, a poem communicates as we’ve seen literature as communication;
that communication is delivered through the medium of teacher to the students.
so students are doing what they are not understanding literature themselves,
not trying to understand the message in the poem making use of language and
all, but they are the told what the message is and that is what they follow; if
they are supposed to explain that poem they will produce what the
teacher has told them this is what you student have been doing. Teacher
tells you summary the main idea and you reproduce it in exams.
They are teacher of literature but they do not know the principles of teaching
literature; that his is how literature should be taught properly. So teacher teach
at their own the way they want. There is no general framework for teaching
literature; like TEFL has guidelines followed by all around the world for teaching
English. Aims and needed and procedure to achieve those aim. For this he
quotes like from F.R Leavis who is trying to define literature as a subject.
So according to Leavis the aim of literature should be that it does all of these
things. And these are the things which no other discipline can do. This should be
aim of literature as a subject according to Leavis’ but Widdowson objects.
This chapter favors stylistic approach towards the study of literature. Widdowson
objects about definition of literature by F.R Leavis and he gives his own
suggestions about the concept of literature and how it should be taught.
F.R. Leavis’ definition of literature as a subject given which indicates what author
sees as the essential benefit deriving form study of literature and in particular
from a study of English literature:
Leavis ascribes to literary study may not be achieved. But pedagogic aims have
to be more limited and realistic and within scope of reasonable attainment. His
ideas are more like philosophy of literary study as a discipline but it has no
indication how one might define pedagogy of literary study as a subject.
ii) There are a number of other discipline which might justifiably claim
to train people acquire precision of response, awareness of the
significance of tradition and so on.
Use of language has vital role in literary writing it differ from other disciplines for
instance a summary of scientific paper retains the quality of scientific
statement, but a summary of novel or poem cannot to be literature.
Leavis’ ascribed effects can be achieved through other disciplines but those
effects come about through a heightened awareness of the way language can be
used to explore and express realities. Student hardly experience text by
themselves so unless they meet text they can’t understand the real sense of
literature.
iv) Leavis’ remarks are made with British universities in mind or at least
with universities in English-speaking countries in mind and the remarks
were made over thirty years ago.
Literary studies have not generally been defined as a subject in such a way as to
develop such sensitivity, either in secondary school or in universities.
WIDDOWSON’S SUGGESTION
comparison with other kinds of discourse will reveal what it is what is unusual to
literary uses of English. So the study of literature is primarily a study of
language uses and such it is not a separate activity from language learning but
an aspect of same activity. Widdowson says that in most cases the individual can
only respond to literature as a result of guidance. One cannot just express to
literary writing but normally what critics and teachers. So often do is to tell
students what message are to be focused in the literary words. This discourages
them to find their own interpretation as the full input of work can only be
recognized by the individual direct experience of it. Widdowson says literature
should be read linguistically and literally. If we disregard we do not understand
the real sense of literature. Let is now consider some of the basic pedagogic
principles that follow from the kind of stylistic approach to literary study that has
been outlined in this book. Firstly, the study of literature is primarily a study of
language use and as such it is not a separate activity from language learning
but an aspect of the same activity. Secondly, it follows that the study of
literature is an overtly comparative one, since not otherwise can it be
practiced as an aspect of language learning in a more general sense. This
principle can be put into conventional use of language to demonstrate the
difference in the way the language system is realized for communicative
purposes. The assumption is that this comparative procedure will develop in the
leaner two kinds of ability. The first is the ability of recognize the manner in
which the signification of linguistic elements is modified by context and thereby
to acquire a strategy for ascertaining their value in actual use. Since it is
common to find considerable divergence between significance and value in
literary discourse, must obviously in the use of metaphor, literature can be
used to demonstrate the kind of reason progress which must operate in
the understanding of any discourse. The argument is that understanding
literature and understanding other kinds of discourse involve the same
correlating procedure of matching code and context meanings but in
understanding literary discourse the procedure is made more overt and self-
conscious.