ROBIN SHARMA ”A LAWYER, A PHILOSOPHER, A WRITER”

Հատված

The concept “individual style” appeared in the French rhetoric in the 18th century, which, according to P. Guiraud, “was the border between the two visions of the world: existentialist and essentialist” [Guiraud, 1963]. Speech began to be viewed not as an absolute reality, but as a product of human thought. Style was no longer interpreted as art, but as individual characteristics of a person (“une genie individuelle”). According to the famous statement of Buffon, “style is the person himself.” The French writer Marivaux was one of the first to try to overcome the normative concept of style (“good” or “bad” style). He spoke of the style of the writer, closely related to his spirit (“esprit”) [Deloffre, 1970: 8]. In the XX century, the discussion about the individual style, about the language of the writer in a work of art was based on the F. de Saussure dichotomy “language / speech”, where the speech differs from language in that “there is nothing collective in it; its manifestations are individual and instantaneous ”[Saussure, 2004: 43]. This opposition was used by various representatives of structural stylistics in the following variations: “language / discourse” (Guillaume), “system / text” (Elmslev), “competence / realization of speech (performance)” (Chomsky), “code / message” (Jacobson), etc. After analyzing the opposition of meaning (in the language) and the effects of meaning (in the text), Guillaume comes to the conclusion that each context actualizes one of the meanings of a linguistic sign to achieve a certain effect. Therefore, there is no style outside the message, outside the text. Style is in general thought to be the province of literary writers. There are numerous versions of the notion of style according to the various aims of stylistic analysis. «The style of any period is the result of a variety of complex and shifting pressures and influences. Books reflect our experience, but our experience is also shaped by the books» [Arnold: 1975:12]. That is why there is the constant interaction between life and literature, life and literary style of any writer. Novelists like E. Hemingway and W. Faulkner and poets like E. Dickinson and W. Whitman are well known for their distinctive literary styles. But journalists, scientists, historians, and mathematicians also have distinctive styles, and they need to know how to vary their styles to fit different audiences. For instance, the first-person narrative style of a popular magazine like National Geographic is quite different from the objective, third-person expository style of a research journal like Scientific American, even though both are written for informational goals. Style is not a matter of right and wrong but of what is appropriate for a particular setting and audience. Let’s review the below two passages that were written by the same author on the same topic with the same main idea, yet have quite various styles: “Experiments show that Heliconius butterflies are less likely to ovipost on host plants that possess eggs or egg-like structures. These egg mimics are an unambiguous example of a plant trait evolved in response to a host-restricted group of insect herbivores.” [Wisconsin Press: 1992:150] “Heliconius butterflies lay their eggs on Passiflora vines. In defense the vines seem to have evolved fake eggs that make it look to the butterflies as if eggs have already been laid on them.”[Wisconsin Press: 1992:150] What changed was the audience. The first passage was predicted for a professional journal read by other biologists, so the style is authoritative and impersonal, applying technical terminology suited to a professional audience. The second passage, predicted for a popular science magazine, applies a more dramatic style, setting up a conflict between the butterflies and the vines, and using well-known words to help readers from non-scientific backgrounds visualize the scientific concept being described. Each style is appropriate for the particular audience.