Scientific-professional style.

Publicist style.

Literary colloquial style.

Familiar colloquial style.

Each style, according to Morokhovsky has a combination of distinctive features. Among them we find oppositions like 'artistic— non-artistic', 'presence of personality—absence of it', 'formal— informal situation', 'equal— unequal social status' (of the participants of communication), 'written or oral form'. Morokhovsky emphasizes that these five classes of what he calls «speech activity» are abstractions rather than realities, they can seldom be observed in their pure forms: mixing styles is the common practice.

On the whole Morokhovsky's concept is one of the few that attempt to differentiate and arrange the taxonomy of cardinal linguistic no­tions. According to Morokhovsky's approach language as a system includes types of thinking differentiating poetic and straightforward language, oral and written speech, and ultimately, bookish and col­loquial functional types of language. The next problem is stylistics of 'speech activity' connected with social stereotypes of speech be­haviour. Morokhovsky defines this in the following way: «Stereotypes of speech behaviour or functional styles of speech activity are norms for wide classes of texts or utterances, in which general social roles are embodied—poet, journalist, manager, politician, scholar, teacher, father, mother, etc.» (15, p. 234).

The number of stereotypes (functional styles) is not unlimited but great enough. For example, texts in official business style may be administrative, juridical, military, commercial, diplomatic, etc. Still further differentiation deals with a division of texts into genres. Thus military texts (official style) comprise 'commands, reports, regulations, manuals, instructions'; diplomatic documents include 'notes, declarations, agreements, treaties', etc. In addition to all this we may speak of 'the individual style' with regard to any kind of text.

In the same year (1984) V. A. Maltzev published a smaller book on stylistics entitled «Essays on English Stylistics» in Minsk.

His theory is based on the broad division of lingual material into «informal» and «formal» varieties and adherence to Skrebnev's system of functional styles.

Prof. Skrebnev uses the term sublanguages in the meaning that is usu­ally attributed to functional styles. The major difference in his use of this term is that he considers innumerable situational communicative

Chapter 4. The Theory of Functional Styles

4.4. An overview of functional style systems

 

products as sublanguages, including each speaker's idiolect. Each act of speech is a sublanguage. This makes the notion of functional style somewhat vague and difficult to define. At the same time Skrebnev recognizes the major opposition of 'formal' and 'informal' sphere of language use and suggests «a very rough and approximate gradation of subspheres and their respective sublanguages» (47, p. 200).

The formal sublanguages in Skrebnev's opinion belong exclusively to the written variety of lingual intercourse. He avoids the claim of inconsistency for including certain types of speeches into this sphere by arguing that texts of some of the types can be read aloud in public.

His rough subdivision of formal styles includes:

a) private correspondence with a stranger;

b) business correspondence between representatives of commercial
or other establishments;

c) diplomatic correspondence, international treaties;

d) legal documents (civil law—testaments, settlements; criminal
law—verdicts, sentences);

e) personal documents (certificates, diplomas, etc.).

The informal colloquial sphere includes all types of colloquial language—literary, non-literary, vulgar, ungrammatical, social di­alects, the vernacular of the underworld, etc. This cannot be inven­toried because of its unlimited varieties.

Of course formal and informal spheres do not exist in severely separated worlds.

The user of the first speech type is fully aware of his social responsibil­ity. He knows the requirements he has to meet and the conventions he

must observe. But the same person may change his lingual behaviour with the change of the environment or situation. Sometimes he is forced to abide by laws that are very different from those he regularly uses: speaking with children, making a speech before parliament or during an electoral campaign.

The first type of speech—'formal'—comprises the varieties that are used in spheres of official communication, science, technology, poetry and fiction, newspaper texts, oratory, etc. It's obvious that many of these varieties can be further subdivided into smaller classes or sublanguages. For example, in the sphere of science and technology almost each science has a metalanguage of its own. The language of computer technology, e.g., is not so limited to the technological sphere as at the time of its beginnings—'to be computer-friendly' has given rise to many other coinages like 'media-friendly', 'market-friendly', 'environmentally friendly', etc.

In the informal type of speech we shan't find so many varieties as in the formal one, but it is used by a much greater number of people. The first and most important informal variety is colloquial style. This is the language used by educated people in informal situations. These people may resort to jargon or slang or even vulgar language to express their negative attitude to somebody or something.

Uneducated people speak «popular» or ungrammatical language, be it English or Russian.

There is also a problem of dialects that would require special consideration that cannot be done within this course. Dialects are not really «ungrammatical» types of a national language, some scholars hold, but a different language with its own laws. However

 

 

Chapter 4. The Theory of Functional Styles

4.4. An overview of functional style systems

 

it may have been true in the last century but not now. And what Skrebnev writes on this problem seems to be argumentative enough.

«Dialects are current in the countryside; cities are nearly untouched by them. In the 19th century England some of the aristocracy were not ashamed of using their local dialects. Nowadays owing to the sound media (radio, cinema and TV) non-standard English in Britain is nearly, as in this country, a sure sign of cultural inferiority, e.g. the status of Cockney.» (47, p. 198).

In his classification of functional styles of modern English that he calls language varieties the famous British linguist D. Crystal suggests the following subdivision of these styles: regional, social, occupational, restricted and individual. (33, 34)

Regional varieties of English reflect the geographical origin of the language used by the speaker: Lancashire variety, Canadian English, Cockney, etc.

Social variations testify to the speaker's family, education, social status background: upper class and non-upper class, a political activist, a member of the proletariat, a Times reader, etc.

Occupational styles present quite a big group that includes the

following types:

a) religious English;

b) scientific English;

c) legal English;

d) plain (official) English;

e) political English;

f) news media English further subdivided into:

• newsreporting;

• journalistics;

• broadcasting;

• sportscommentary;

• advertising.

Restricted English includes very tightly constrained uses of language when little or no linguistic variation is permitted. In these cases special rules are created by man to be consciously learned and used. These rules control everything that can be said. According to Crystal restricted varieties appear both in domestic and occupational spheres and include the following types:

a) knitwrite in books on knitting;

b) cookwrite in recipe books;

c) congratulatory messages;

d) newspaper announcements;

e) newspaper headlines;

 

f) sportscasting scores;

g) airspeak, the language of air traffic control;

h) emergencyspeak, the language for the emergency services; i) e-mail variety, etc.

Individual variation involves types of speech that arise from the speaker's personal differences meaning such features as physique, interests, personality, experience and so on. A particular blend of

Chapter 4. The Theory of Functional Styles

4.5. Distinctive linguistic features of the major functional styles

 

social and geographical backgrounds may produce a distinctive accent or dialect. Educational history, occupational experience, personal skills and tastes, hobbies or literary preferences will foster the use of habitual words and turns of phrase, or certain kinds of grammatical construction.

Also noticeable will be favourite discourse practices—a tendency to develop points in an argument in a certain way, or an in­clination for certain kinds of metaphor. Some people are 'good conversationalists', 'good story-tellers', 'good letter-writers', 'good speech-makers'. What actually makes them so is the subject of stylistic research.

There are also a number of cases where individuality in the use of English—a personal style—is considered to be a matter of particular importance and worthy of study in its own right. Such is the study of the individual style of a writer or poet: Shakespeare's style, Faulkner's style, and the like.

Literary colloquial style

Phonetic features

Standard pronunciation in compliance with the national norm, enunciation.

Phonetic compression of frequently used forms, e.g. it's, don't, I've.

Omission of unaccented elements due to the quick tempo, e. g. you know him?

Morphological features

Use of regular morphological features, with interception of evaluative suffixes e.g. deary, doggie, duckie.

 

4.5. Distinctive linguistic features of the major functional styles of English

A description of five major functional styles given in this section is based on their most distinctive features on each level of the language structure: pnonetical (where possible), morphological, syntactical, lexical and compositional. A peculiar combination of these features and special emphasis on some of them creates the paradigm of what is called a scientific or publicist text, a legal or other official document, colloquial or formal speech.

Syntactical features

Use of simple sentences with a number of participial and infinitive constructions and numerous parentheses.

Syntactically correct utterances compliant with the literary norm.

Use of various types of syntactical compression, simplicity of syntac­tical connection.

Prevalence of active and finite verb forms.

Use of grammar forms for emphatic purposes, e. g. progressive verb forms to express emotions of irritation, anger etc.

Chapter 4. The Theory of Functional Styles

Decomposition and ellipsis of sentences in a dialogue (easily recon­structed from the context).

Use of special colloquial phrases, e. g. that friend of yours.

Lexical features

Wide range of vocabulary strata in accordance with the register of communication and participants' roles: formal and informal, neutral and bookish, terms and foreign words.

Basic stock of communicative vocabulary—stylistically neutral.

Use of socially accepted contracted forms and abbreviations, e. g. fridge for refrigerator, ice for ice-cream, TV for television, CD for compact disk, etc.

Use of etiquette language and conversational formulas, such as nice to see you, my pleasure, on behalf of, etc.

Extensive use of intensifiers and gap-fillers, e.g. absolutely, definitely, awfully, kind of, so to speak, I mean, if I may say so.

Use of interjections and exclamations, e.g. Dear me, My God, Goodness, well, why, now, oh.

Extensive use of phrasal verbs let sb down, put up with, stand sb up. Use of words of indefinite meaning like thing, stuff. Avoidance of slang, vulgarisms, dialect words, jargon. Use of phraseological expressions, idioms and figures of speech.

4.5. Distinctive linguistic features of the major functional styles

Compositional features

Can be used in written and spoken varieties: dialogue, monologue, personal letters, diaries, essays, articles, etc.

Prepared types of texts may have thought out and logical composi­tion, to a certain extent determined by conventional forms (letters, presentations, articles, interviews).

Spontaneous types have a loose structure, relative coherence and uniformity of form and content.

Familiar colloquial style

Represented in spoken variety.

Phonetic features

Casual and often careless pronunciation, use of deviant forms, e. g. gonna instead of going to, whatcha instead of what do you, dunno instead of don't know.

Use of reduced and contracted forms, e.g. you're, they've, I'd.

Omission of unaccented elements due to quick tempo, e.g. you hear me?

Emphasis on intonation as a powerful semantic and stylistic instru­ment capable to render subtle nuances of thought and feeling.

Use of onomatopoeic words, e. g. whoosh, hush, stop yodelling, yum, yak.

Chapter 4. The Theory of Functional Styles

Morphological features

Use of evaluative suffixes, nonce words formed on morphologi­cal and phonetic analogy with other nominal words: e.g. baldish, mawkish, moody, hanky-panky, helter-skelter, plates of meet (feet), okeydoke.

Extensive use of collocations and phrasal verbs instead of neutral and literary equivalents: e. g. to turn in instead of to go to bed.

Syntactical features

Use of simple short sentences.

Dialogues are usually of the question-answer type.

Use of echo questions, parallel structures, repetitions of various kinds.

In complex sentences asyndetic coordination is the norm.

Coordination is used more often than subordination, repeated use of conjunction and is a sign of spontaneity rather than an expressive device.

Extensive use of ellipsis, including the subject of the sentence e. g. Can't say anything.

Extensive use of syntactic tautology, e.g. That girl, she was something else!

Abundance of gap-fillers and parenthetical elements, such as sure, indeed, to be more exact, okay, well.

4.5. Distinctive linguistic features of the major functional styles

Lexical features

Combination of neutral, familiar and low colloquial vocabulary, including slang, vulgar and taboo words.

Extensive use of words of general meaning, specified in meaning by the situation guy, job, get, do, fix, affair.

Limited vocabulary resources, use of the same word in different meanings it may not possess, e. g. 'some' meaning good: some guy!some game! 'nice' meaning impressive, fascinating, high quality: nice music.

Abundance of specific colloquial interjections: boy, wow, hey, there, ahoy.

Use of hyperbole, epithets, evaluative vocabulary, trite metaphors and simile, e.g. if you say it once more I'll kill you, as old as the hills, horrid, awesome, etc.

Tautological substitution of personal pronouns and names by other nouns, e.g. you-baby, Johnny-boy.

Mixture of curse words and euphemisms, e. g. damn, dash, darned, shoot.

Compositional features

Use of deviant language on all levels.

Strong emotional colouring.

Loose syntactical organisation of an utterance.

Chapter 4. The Theory of Functional Styles

4.5. Distinctive linguistic features of the major functional styles

 

Frequently little coherence or adherence to the topic. No special compositional patterns.

4.5.3. Publicist (media) style

Phonetic features (in oratory)

Standard pronunciation, wide use of prosody as a means of conveying the subtle shades of meaning, overtones and emotions.

Phonetic compression.

Morphological features

Frequent use of non-finite verb forms, such as gerund, participle, infinitive.

Use of non-perfect verb forms.

Omission of articles, link verbs, auxiliaries, pronouns, especially in headlines and news items.

Syntactical features

Frequent use of rhetorical questions and interrogatives in oratory speech.

In headlines: use of impersonal sentences, elliptical constructions, interrogative sentences, infinitive complexes and attributive groups.

In news items and articles: news items comprise one or two, rarely three, sentences.

Absence of complex coordination with chain of subordinate clauses and a number of conjunctions.

Prepositional phrases are used much more than synonymous gerundial phrases.

Absence of exclamatory sentences, break-in-the narrative, other expressively charged constructions.

Articles demonstrate more syntactical organisation and logical ar­rangement of sentences.

Lexical features

Newspaper cliches and set phrases.

Terminological variety: scientific, sports, political, technical, etc.

Abbreviations and acronyms.

Numerous proper names, toponyms, anthroponyms, names of enter­prises, institutions, international words, dates and figures.

Abstract notion words, elevated and bookish words.

In headlines: frequent use of pun, violated phraseology, vivid stylistic devices.

In oratory speech: words of elevated and bookish character, colloquial words and phrases, frequent use of such stylistic devices as metaphor, alliteration, allusion, irony, etc.

Chapter 4. The Theory of Functional Styles

4.5. Distinctive linguistic features of the major functional styles

 

Use of conventional forms of address and trite phases.

Compositional features

Text arrangement is marked by precision, logic and expressive power.

Carefully selected vocabulary.

Variety of topics.

Wide use of quotations, direct speech and represented speech.

Use of parallel constructions throughout the text.

In oratory: simplicity of structural expression, clarity of message, argumentative power.

In headlines: use of devices to arrest attention: rhyme, pun, puzzle, liigh degree of compression, graphical means.

In news items and articles: strict arrangement of titles and subtitles, emphasis on the headline.

Careful subdivision into paragraphs, clearly defined position of the sections of an article: the most important information is carried in the opening paragraph; often in the first sentence.