Strategie inglese

Strategie inglese

Discourse analysis

To delve into something → really going deeply into the topic.

Discourse, text, coherent, cohesive

Discourse is an uncountable term. This is the first difference between Italian and English; in Italian, discourse can be plural, in English no. We will also analyze speeches, which on the contrary is countable.

Discourse - Discourse is a unit of text used by linguists for the analysis of linguistic phenomena that conveys a world picture.

It's a unit of text, different pieces of text, a unit of text, used by linguists. This tells us that experts use this term a lot. It is a specialized term used by specialists to try to identify some of its features related to language. A world picture is your own view or the perspective in which you look at the world. Every single speaker will convey his own picture by choosing a particular word. We will analyze the way in which speakers use language to interpret the world.

A text conveys a message and has to be expressed by words. This text has to be important, relevant, and appropriate to the context, to the speaker, and to the receiver.

Being appropriate means being cohesive. It comes from cohesion; it is when all the pieces are around the same topic. Making no sense could mean that the text is not cohesive. Cohesion (coeso) goes with coherent (coerente). Consistent is the actual translation of coerente used for a person or attitude.

Cohesion means we are dealing with the first topic. Texts must be logically organized, and we have to read in a coherent approach, along a cohesive perspective, treating a text as an informative document.

Discourse analysis

Analyzing your own topic, using your own words to analyze the text, in order to convey a message. You are not just summarizing, you are doing discourse analysis, trying to interpret the way in which a message was conveyed.

Definition

The study of the ways in which language is used in texts and contexts. Developed in the 1970s, discourse analysis "concerns itself with the use of language in a running discourse, continued over a number of sentences, and involving the interaction of speaker (or writer) and auditor (or reader) in a specific situational context, and within a framework of social and cultural conventions" (M.H. Abrams and G.G. Harpham, A Glossary of Literary Terms, 2005).

What is 'discourse'?

Noun (/ˈdɪskɔːs)

• Verbal communication; talk; conversation
• A formal treatment of a subject in speech or writing, such as a sermon or dissertation
• A unit of text used by linguists for the analysis of linguistic phenomena that range over more than one sentence ... that conveys a 'world picture'

What is 'text'?

A set of coherent and cohesive language elements that convey an informative message (coherence), coherent: (of ideas, thoughts, arguments, etc.) logical and well-organized; easy to understand and clear. (Note: 'coerente' is 'coherent' here, but it can also be translated as 'consistent', that is, 'not self-contradictory').

(Cohesion) cohesive: forming a united whole. Informative: providing information.

Discourse analysis

An approach that looks at patterns of language across texts as well as at the social and cultural contexts in which the texts occur (where context stands for “the conditions and circumstances that are relevant to an event, fact, etc.”).

Context and co-text

Context is an important word. Co-text is a word that surrounds the words in your text.

• Co-text – the linguistic environment of a word
• Context – the non-verbal environment in which a word is used

Originally, the context meant the accompanying text, the wording that came before and after whatever was under attention. In the nineteenth century, it was extended to things other than language, both concrete and abstract: the context of the building, the moral context of the day. But if you were talking about language, then it still referred to the surrounding words, and it was only in modern linguistics that it came to refer to the non-verbal environment in which language was used. When that happened, it was Catford, I think, who suggested that we now needed another term to refer explicitly to the verbal environment; and he proposed the term “co-text.”

If you are analyzing the text, also the context is important; all the speakers live in an environment. Context has something to do with words. It determines influences, affects the words, the speech, the expression. In order to carry out or fully comment my analysis, I have to consider the context.

Discourse analysis

Analyze = examine = research = delve into something (to delve into the topic → to examine deeply). Discourse = a unit of text used by linguists for the analysis of linguistic phenomena that range over more than one sentence … that conveys a world picture ≠ Speech = a piece of talk, a piece of conversation. People talking in public or private occasions (countable). In order to describe a discourse, we use a text. Text = a set of coherent and cohesive language elements that convey an informative message. Discourse analysis and texts are linguistic elements, the context is not a linguistic element (it’s not words). Co-text = the world that surrounds words is the speech. Context = it is the environment in/by which texts occur. It can be a temporal, a cultural, a space context. It is the conditions and circumstances that are relevant to an event, fact, etc. (where a text takes place). Context has something to do with words → words depend on the context. Context affects, determines the words, the speech, features that I pick in order to convey the message.

Defining discourse analysis

Discourse analysis is an approach that looks at patterns of language across texts (corpora = number of corpus relating texts) as well as the social and cultural contexts in which texts occur.

It is an approach, a way of studying, that looks at patterns of language (a pattern language, I will change my model of language, it's a module that repeats itself, reoccurrences of the same language, models, sequences) across texts (a number of corpus related texts).

So discourse definition is an approach that looks at patterns of language across texts. Discourse analysis is an approach that looks at patterns (a module which repeats itself throughout a text) of language across texts (so I'm looking at a corpora = a number of texts), as well as it also looks at the social and cultural context in which texts occur. Why? Because text is related to context, which changes the way I'm speaking.

I can describe this class in two ways:

• Literal, without any subjective observation.
• Figurative (expressing my emotion).

Words can also be denotative (denotation) or connotative (connotation). Denotative are literal words, connotative are figurative words. With connotative words, I'm expressing a meaning, but with my own experiences and emotions.

If we want to translate "magra" in a denotative and connotative word; but connotative can be positive, extremely positive, or negative or extremely negative.

Actually thin is between denotative and negative because it is not really negative. Connotation says something about my opinion, denotative is just objective.

Undaunted - irremovibile

Strong-minded - rationally determined

Strong-willed - playing 100% to reach that goal

Resolute

Single-minded - I have one purpose in mind and I cannot be persuaded to change my mind

Stubborn

Literal vs figurative language

So....What is the difference between figurative language and literal language?

Figurative language often means something different than what is said on the surface. Literal language means exactly what it says. It’s intended to be understood literally.... And this brings us directly to.....

Evaluative language: connotation and denotation

• Literal: it’s an objective description, it’s conveyed in a very neutral language. No subjective connotation, the facts are simply reported as they are. Words are denotative → denotation.
• Figurative: an evocative description. Emotions are expressed while speaking. Words are connotative → connotation. Connotation can be positive or negative but also extra-positive or extremely negative. There are different degrees of connotations.

So, some words are literal, others are more evocative (figurative).

Sometimes also the sound of a word can help us understand in which group the word belongs to → ex. Pleasant vs. stubborn.

So … Literal vs figurative language

Literal language = refers to objects as they are, neutral meaning. Literal language means exactly what it says. It’s intended to be understood literally.

Figurative language = cannot rely on literal meaning but it can also have a cultural, political meaning. Figurative language often means something different than what is said on the surface.

Figures of speech

Why do we use figures of speech? Why do we use figurative language in general?

• Creative people like to describe something to emphasize some features → this room is like the sun. Emphasis. The first reason is:.
• It will be immediate; you are visualizing it, you would use your ears, eyes, and senses, you would visualize the meaning; you are bypassing words by figures of speech.
• My willingness to shape something new, on the part of the speaker → creativity, intellectual effort, inventiveness.
• The reaction of the public can be negative because it may not understand the meaning of figures of speech, so figurative language is useful to help people understand, but there should be a common ground.

They should help them to understand the message better; it helps the audience to visualize, it is easier to understand what somebody means.

Connotation

Evaluative language: connotation > Figures of speech

What is a figure of speech? A figure of speech is an expression of our language intended to create a unique effect or meaning. Why do we use figures of speech in our language? Figures of speech make our language and culture more interesting.

• Metaphor: a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action that it does not literally denote in order to imply a resemblance, for example, he is a lion in battle
• Personification: the attribution of human characteristics to things, abstract ideas, etc., as for literary or artistic effect
• Simile: a figure of speech that expresses the resemblance of one thing to another of a different category, usually introduced by as or like
• Metonymy: the substitution of a word referring to an attribute for the thing that is meant, as for example the use of the crown to refer to a monarch
• Antithesis [ses]: the juxtaposition of contrasting ideas, phrases, or words so as to produce an effect of balance, such as my words fly up, my thoughts remain below
• Oxymoron [a]: an epigrammatic effect, by which contradictory terms are used in conjunction “living death”, “deafening silence”
• Hyperbole: a deliberate exaggeration used for effect “he embraced her a thousand times”

Case study: content- and structure-related figures of speech

Had Cameron prepared the ground with other governments in advance, he might have succeeded. Had Cameron talked to fellow centre-right leaders on the summit's eve instead of staying out of their political group, he would have known that he could not.

Patterns of language ... in cultural contexts

Evaluative language: Culture-oriented language (spec. noticeable in idioms and through translation) = language as expression of culture.

Culture-oriented idioms

Consider the following idioms:

• Can they be literally translated into your own language (Italian)? Do they express denotation or connotation? If the latter, is it positive or negative?
• Which cannot and why?

egghead vs teste d’uovo (meno com. teste a uovo), calco dell’inglese eggheads, denominazione iron. con cui negli Stati Uniti d’America sono definiti gli intellettuali specialisti di teorie politiche ed economiche.

• Bad apple: mela marcia vs
• Big cheese: [Among different hypotheses, big cheese could be based on the only positive slang sense of cheese that seems ever to have existed. This was first recorded in London in the nineteenth century, in forms like he’s the cheese, it’s quite the cheese, just the cheese, or simply the cheese, with the sense of a thing that was “good, first-rate in quality, genuine, pleasant or advantageous”. Its American English origin seems to be linked to the circumstance related to 'to cut a big cheese', a figurative expression for "look important" which spread as overlarge wheels of cheese, especially from Wisconsin, were commonly displayed 19c. as publicity stunts by retailers, etc.]
• Couch potato
• Tough cookie: 'osso duro'
• Top banana
• Sour grapes
• Lemon law: [lemon (n.2) "worthless thing," 1909, American English slang; from lemon (n.1), perhaps via criminal slang sense of "a person who is a loser, a simpleton," which is perhaps from the notion of someone a sharper can "suck the juice out of." [...] Or it simply may be a metaphor for something which leaves a bad taste in one's mouth.]

Thus, in some cases, idioms are not literally transcribable BECAUSE for their construction and meaning, they rely on cultural references that only belong to a specific context.

Here are further examples:

Culture-oriented idioms

• “Not for all the tea in China” [per nulla al mondo] [This phrase originated around the late 19th/early 20th century and derives from the fact that China was well-known to produce tea in huge quantities. That is still the case and China now accounts for around a quarter of the world's production of tea. So, to decline the offer to do something 'for all the tea in China' is to be determined not to do it, whatever inducement is offered.]
• “He/it/she is (not) my cup of tea” [non è il mio genere] In the early 20th century, a 'cup of tea' was such a synonym for acceptability that it became the name given to a favoured friend, especially one with a boisterous, life-enhancing nature. [...] People or things with which one felt an affinity began to be called 'my cup of tea' in the 1930s. Nancy Mitford appears to be the first to record that term in print, in the comic novel Christmas Pudding, 1932: I'm not at all sure I wouldn't rather marry Aunt Loudie. She's even more my cup of tea in many ways.[...] The expression is more often used in the 'not my cup of tea' form these days. This negative usage began in WWII.]

Culture-oriented idioms

• “A piece of cake” [facile] [something easily obtained or achieved; It is thought that this idiom originated in the 1870s when it was tradition to give cakes as prizes in competitions.[...] From this, the expression ‘a piece of cake’ started being used to describe something that was easy to achieve. “I’m sure the test next week will be a piece of cake for me. I’ve been studying for weeks!” “The football match today was a piece of cake! All the best players in the other team had injuries so we scored 6 goals!”]

Description of a person by another person (S. Barry)

“The King was as big as a bed” vs “Il re era grande come un letto”

Metaphor > Juliet is the sun. Romeo is speaking; we can also have different categories of audience (my parents, my friends, or myself as an interior monologue).

Why does Romeo say that Juliet is the sun?

• Maybe because he is deeply in love with her → this is the last step of the process!
• In order to get to the last step, I have to think what the sun is for me → the sun is vital for human beings, Romeo is a human being, Juliet is the sun for him because she is vital for him.
• Among all the meanings of sun, I will pick the best meaning between sun, yellow, heat, light, and warmth. I will pick the last one because it will be crucial for vitality.
• My next step is to list all the different features about the sun and then try to find the best one, check every single factor until you find the best one.

So:

1. I understand there is a comparison
2. Comparison
3. I find the right one
4. I replace the correct feature in the comparison at the beginning

Juliet is the target of the metaphor.

Where my metaphor aims or whom, it describes the one who I am referring to.

The sun is the element which provides me with the term of comparison; I can keep Juliet the target, but I will have thousands of terms of comparison.

The sun is the source of the metaphor.

If these two elements, the source and the target, overlap, we can have a comparison.

This will be my ground of comparison. Meaning why I should overlap them, compare them.

Paul is a snake! Paul is the target, the snake is the source.

In this case, there is a second step further on; my source is still a natural element, but in this case, I am not relying on literal features, I am relying on a cultural reference, in this case, the Bible. A snake is a symbol of the devil, is highly negative not literally but culturally. In order to spot the ground of the element, I am relying on cultural figures, I am relying on...