Pragmatic markers in contemporary poetry: A corpus-based discourse analysis

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Poetic discourse, which engages the poetic function of language as a constitutive one, transforms the postulates of pragmatics of ordinary language. New poetic practices often represent a kind of pragmatic experiment: the effect of linguopragmatic parameters inherent in conventional communication is tested here on the borderline between the norm and the anomaly. The aim of this study is to identify the specific functionality of pragmatic markers in the condition of increased permeability between discourses and to explore the features of trans-discourse interaction of poetic language and colloquial speech in new media. The study is based on a corpus of poetic texts (3 million words), including Russian, English, and Italian subcorpora. It identified new communicative strategies of addressing and clusters of deictic, modal and discourse markers, grouped according to Jakobson’s communicative model (Jakobson 1975). The study identified qualitative differences between the frequency of use of several units in poetic discourse and in colloquial speech. We considered various pragmatic strategies, referring not only to individual units, but also clusters of deictic, modal, and discourse words, etc. We found that Italian and Russian poetry uses discourse markers more often than American poetry. Differences in linguistic structure also affect the specifics of a pragmatic experiment. Thus, in American poetry, a pragmatic experiment often activates the syntactic level; in Russian poetry, experiments with word formation and modality are more frequent; in Italian poetry, the pragmatic experiment is often combined with the structural-syntactic one: pragmatic markers form “clusters” or “chains”, when an increase in the density of use of units leads to an increase in the range of deviations from standard usage. The research based on the poetic corpus of texts contributes to the study of poetic discourse and corpus pragmatics.

About the authors

Olga V. Sokolova

Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Sciences

Author for correspondence.
Email: olga.sokolova@iling-ran.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-4399-0094

Dr. Habil. in Philology, Senior Researcher at Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Sciences, Yuri Stepanov Centre for Theory and Practice of Communication. Her research specialises in the theory of discourse, linguistic pragmatics and poetics, and the language of political, advertising and avant-garde texts.

Moscow, Russia

Vladimir V. Feshchenko

Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Sciences

Email: vladimirfeshchenko@iling-ran.ru
ORCID iD: 0000-0003-1323-4220

Dr. Habil.; Leading Researcher, Institute of Linguistics, Russian Academy of Sciences, Yuri Stepanov Centre for Theory and Practice of Communication. His research focuses on theoretical linguistics, poetics, semiotics and avant-garde poetry.

Moscow, Russia

References

  1. Богданова-Бегларян Н. В., Блинова О. В., Мартыненко Г. Я., Шерстинова Т. Ю., Зайдес К. Д., Попова Т. И. Аннотирование прагматических маркеров в русском речевом корпусе: проблемы, поиски, решения, результаты // Компьютерная лингвистика и интеллектуальные технологии: По материалам ежегодной международной конференции «Диалог» / под ред. В. П. Селегей. Вып. 18 (25). 2019. С. 72-85. [Bogdanova-Beglaryan, Natalia V., Olga V. Blinova, Grigoriy Ya. Martynenko, Tat’yana Yu. Sherstinova, Kristina D. Zaydes, Tatiana I. Popova. 2019. Annotirovanie pragmaticheskikh markerov v russkom rechevom korpuse: problemy, poiski, resheniya, rezul’taty (Annotating pragmatic markers in the Russian speech corpus: Problems, searches, solutions, results). In Vladimir P. Selegey (ed.), Komp’yuternaya lingvistika i intellektual’nye tekhnologii: Po materialam ezhegodnoy mezhdunarodnoy konferentsii “Dialog” 18 (25), 72-85. (In Russ.)].
  2. Вендлер З. Иллокутивное самоубийство // Новое в зарубежной лингвистике / под ред. Е. В. Падучевой. М.: Прогресс, 1985. Вып. XVI. С. 238-250. [Vendler, Zeno. 1985. Illocutfonary suicide. In Elens V. Paducheva (ed.), Novoe v zarubezhnoy lingvistike, 238-250. Moscow. (In Russ.)].
  3. Золян С.Т. Семантика и структура поэтического текста. М.: URSS, 2014. [Zolyan, Suren T. 2014. Semantika i struktura poeticheskogo teksta (Semantics and Structure of Poetic Text). Moscow: URSS. (In Russ.)].
  4. Иванов Вяч. Вс. Категория определенности-неопределенности и шифтеры // Категория определенности-неопределенности в славянских и балтийских языках. М.: Наука, 1979. [Ivanov, Vyacheslav Vs. 1979. Kategoriya opredelennosti-neopredelennosti i shiftery (The category of certainty-uncertainty and shifters). In Tat’yana M. Nikolaeva (ed.), The category of definiteness-indeterminacy in the Slavic and Baltic languages. Moscow: Nauka. (In Russ.)].
  5. Ковтунова И.И. Поэтический синтаксис. М.: Наука, 1986. [Kovtunova, Irina I. 1986. Poeticheskiy sintaksis (Poetic Syntax). Moscow: Nauka. (In Russ.)].
  6. Николина Н.А. Активные процессы в языке современной русской художественной литературы. М.: Гнозис, 2009. [Nikolina, Natalia A. 2009. Aktivnye protsessy v yazyke sovremennoy russkoy khudozhestvennoy literatury (Active Processes in the Language of Contemporary Russian Fiction). Moscow: Gnozis. (In Russ.)].
  7. Новое в зарубежной лингвистике / сост. Н.Д. Арутюнова. Вып. 16. Лингвистическая прагматика. М.: Прогресс, 1985. [Arutyunova, Nina D. (ed.). 1985. Novoe v zarubezhnoy lingvistike Vol 16 (New in Foreign Linguistics). Moscow: Progress. (In Russ.)].
  8. Орлицкий Ю.Б. Стихосложение новейшей русской поэзии. М.: Языки славянской культуры, 2020. [Orlitskiy, Yurij B. 2020. Stikhoslozhenie noveyshey russkoy poezii (Versification of Modern Russian Poetry). Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskoy kul’tury. (In Russ.)].
  9. Остин Дж. Л. Слово как действие / пер. с англ. А.А. Медниковой // Новое в зарубежной лингвистике. Теория речевых актов. 1986. Вып. XVII. С. 22-130. [Ostin, John L. 1986. How to do things with words. Novoe v zarubezhnoy lingvistike. Teoriya rechevykh aktov. XVII. 22-130. (In Russ.)].
  10. Падучева Е.В. Высказывание и его соотнесенность с действительностью. М.: Языки русской культуры, 1985. [Paducheva, Elena V. 1985. Vyskazyvanie i ego sootnesennost’ s deystvitel’nost’yu (The Statement and its Correlation with Reality). Moscow: Yazyki russkoy kul’tury. (In Russ.)].
  11. Самостиенко Е.В. Технологическая метафора и коммуникативные модели в новейшей русскоязычной поэзии Слово.ру: Балтийский акцент. Т. 15. № 2. 2024. 160-179. [Samostienko, Evgenija V. 2024. Technological Metaphor and Communicative Models in Contemporary Russian Poetry. Slovo.ru: Baltiyskiy Aktsent 15 (2). 160-179. (In Russ.)]. https://doi.org/10.5922/2225-5346-2024-2-10
  12. Северская О.И. «Субъект» современной поэзии как прагматическая переменная // Субъект в новейшей русскоязычной поэзии - теория и практика / под ред. Х. Шталь и Е. Евграшкиной. Berlin: Peter Lang, 2018. С. 185-194. [Severskaya, Olga I. 2018. «Sub"ekt» sovremennoy poezii kak pragmaticheskaya peremennaya (The “subject” of modern poetry as a pragmatic variable). In Henrike Shtal & Ekaterina Evgrashkina (eds.), The subject in modern Russian-language poetry - theory and practice, 185-194. Berlin: Peter Lang. (In Russ.)].
  13. Сёрль Дж. Косвенные речевые акты / Пер. с англ. Н.В. Перцова // Новое в зарубежной лингвистике. Теория речевых актов. 1986. Вып. XVII. С. 195-222. [Searle, John R. 1986. Indirect speech acts. Novoe v zarubezhnoy lingvistike. Teoriya rechevykh aktov XVII. 195-222. (In Russ.)].
  14. Соколова О.В. Новые технологии и прагматические техники в современной поэзии // Слово.ру: балтийский акцент. 2024. Т. 15. №2. С. 81-97. [Sokolova, Olga V. 2024. New technologies and pragmatic techniques in Contemporary Poetry. Slovo.ru: Baltiyskiy Aktsent 15 (2). 81-97. (In Russ.)]. https://doi.org/10.5922/2225-5346-2024-2-5
  15. Соколова О.В. От авангарда к неоавангарду. Язык, субъективность, культурные переносы. М.: Культурная революция, 2019. [Sokolova, Olga V. 2019. From Avant-Garde to Neo-Avant-Garde: Language, Subjectivity, Cultural Transfers. Moscow. (In Russ.)].
  16. Соколова О.В., Захаркив Е.В. Креативная прагматика поэтического дискурса // Критика и семиотика. 2021. № 2. C. 88-106. [Sokolova, Olga V. & Ekaterina V. Zakharkiv. 2021. Creative pragmatics of poetic discourse. Kritika i semiotika. 2. 88-106. (In Russ.)]. https://doi.org/10.25205/2307-1737-2021-2-88-106
  17. Фещенко В.В. Дейксис как присутствие субъекта в поэтическом тексте: теоретические подходы // Субъект в новейшей русскоязычной поэзии. Berlin: Peter Lang, 2018а. C. 157-169. [Feshchenko, Vladimir V. 2018a. Deiksis kak prisutstvie sub"ekta v poeticheskom tekste: teoreticheskie podkhody (Deixis as the presence of the subject in a poetic text: Theoretical approaches). Sub"ekt v noveyshey russkoyazychnoy poezii. Berlin: Peter Lang. 157-169. (In Russ.)].
  18. Фещенко В.В. Литературный авангард на лингвистических поворотах. СПб.: Издательство Европейского университета в Санкт-Петербурге, 2018б. [Feshchenko, Vladimir V. 2018b. The Linguistic Turns of the Literary Avant-Garde. Saint-Petersburg: the European University in St. Petersburg Press. (In Russ.)].
  19. Фещенко В.В. Экспериментальный дейксис в пространстве поэтического текста // Слово.ру: Балтийский акцент. № 2. 2023. С. 49-66. [Feshchenko, Vladimir V. 2023. Experimental deixis in the space of poetic text. Slovo.ru: Baltiyskiy Aktsent 2. 49-66. (In Russ.)]. https://doi.org/10.5922/2225-5346-2023-2-3
  20. Шимчук Э.Г., Щур М.Г. Словарь русских частиц. Берлин: Peter Lang, 1999. [Shimchuk, Emma G. & Marina G. Shchur. 1999. Slovar’ russkikh chastits (Dictionary of Russian particles). Berlin: Peter Lang. (In Russ.)].
  21. Якобсон Р.О. Лингвистика и поэтика // Структурализм: «за» и «против». М.: Прогресс, 1975. С. 193-231. [Jakobson, Roman O. 1975. Linguistics and Poetics. Strukturalizm: «za» i «protiv». Moscow: Progress. 193-231. (In Russ.)].
  22. Aijmer, Karin & Anne-Marie Simon-Vandenbergen. 2011. Pragmatic markers. In Jan Zienkowski, Jan-Ola Östman & Jef Verschueren (eds.), Discursive pragmatics, 223-247. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/hoph.8.13aij
  23. Aijmer, Karin & Christoph Rühlemann (eds.). 2014. Corpus Pragmatics. A Handbook. Cambridge University Press.
  24. Bazzanella, Carla. 2015. Segnali discorsivi a confronto. In Margarita B. Zuloaga & Sonia G.J. Ferary (eds.), Dati e teoria, un percorso integrato. Les marqueurs du discours dans les langues romanes: une approche contrastive, 35-46. Limoges: Lambert-Lucas.
  25. Beeching, Kate. 2016. Pragmatic Markers in British English: Meaning in Social Interaction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  26. Bonifazi, Anna. 2009. The pragmatic meanings of some discourse markers in Homer. In Elisabeth Rieken & Paul Widmer (eds.), Pragmatische kategorien: Form, funktion und diachronie. Akten der Arbeitstagung der Indogermanischen Gesellschaft von 24. Bis 26. September 2007 in Marburg, 29-36. Wiesbaden: Reichert.
  27. Brinton, Laurel J. 2017. The Evolution of Pragmatic Markers in English: Pathways of Change. Cambridge University Press.
  28. Dardano, Maurizio. 2012. Segnali discorsivi della prima poesia italiana. In Barbara Wehr & Nicolosi Frédéric (eds.), Pragmatique historique et syntaxe - Historische Pragmatik und Syntax: Actes de la section du même nom du XXXI e Romanistentag allemand - Akten der gleichnamigen Sektion des XXXI. Deutschen Romanistentags (Bonn, 27.9.-1.10.2009), 47-68. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
  29. Derrida, Jacques. 1988. Limited Inc. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University Press.
  30. Feshchenko, Vladimir & Olga Sokolova. 2023. Visualising Deixis in Avant-Garde and Contemporary Poetry “On and Off the Page”. In Magdalena Korecka & Wiebke Vorrath (eds.), Poetry and Contemporary Visual Culture / Lyrik und zeitgenössische Visuelle Kultur, 49-72. Berlin, Boston: De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111299334-003
  31. Feshchenko, Vladimir V. 2023. Artistic communication as an object of semiotics and linguistic aesthetics. Sign Systems Studies 3-4. 565-603. https://doi.org/10.12697/ SSS.2023.51.3-4.04
  32. Fraser, Bruce. 1996. Pragmatic markers. Pragmatics 6 (2). 167-190. https://doi.org/ 10.1075/prag.6.2.03fra
  33. Fraser, Bruce. 2009. An account of discourse markers. International Review of Pragmatics 1. 293-320. https://doi.org/10.1163/187730909X12538045489818
  34. Green, Keith. 1992. A Study of Deixis in Relation to Lyric Poetry. Sheffield: University of Sheffield.
  35. Hillis Miller, Joseph. 2001. Speech Acts in Literature. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  36. Jefferson, Gail. 1996. On the poetics of ordinary talk. Text and Performance Quarterly 16 (1). 1-61.
  37. Leech, Geoffrey N. 1983. Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
  38. Levinson, Stephen C. 1983. Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  39. Person, Raymond F., Robin Wooffitt & John P. Rae (eds.). 2022. Bridging the Gap Between Conversation Analysis and Poetics. Studies in Talk-In-Interaction and Literature Twenty-Five Years after Jefferson. New York and London: Routledge.
  40. Rühlemann, Christoph. 2019. Corpus Linguistics for Pragmatics: A Guide for Research. London and New York: Routledge.
  41. Schoonjans, Steven. 2014. Zu den französischen Entsprechungen der deutschen Modalpartikeln ja und doch in literarischen Texten. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen 115 (4). 401-424. https://doi.org/10.1080/00393274.2013.780219
  42. Sell, Roger D. (ed.) 1991. Literary Pragmatics. London; N.Y.: Routledge Revivals.
  43. Sperber, Dan & Deirdre Wilson. 1986. Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.
  44. Stockwell, Peter. 2002. Cognitive Poetics. An Introduction. London: Routledge.
  45. Verschueren, Jef. 1999. Understanding Pragmatics. London: Edward Arnold.

Copyright (c) 2024 Sokolova O.V., Feshchenko V.V.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies