Individudlni styl-problem a reśeni

Petr Mareś




Abstract

First part of the article outlines the evolution of the concept of individual style in stylistics. Second and third part point out the theoretical and methodological problems connected with the above-mentioned concept and draw attention to several possible Solutions. The radical solution consists - in the tradition of the negativistic propositions submitted by B. Gray in his book Style. The Problem and its Solution (1969) - in denying the existence of the phenomenon of individual style (Ch. Grimm, Zum Mythos Individualstil, 1991). If we want to defend the legitimacy and usefulness of the concept, we have to take into account various factors. (1) Individual style manifests itself in the whole textual production of a person, but only a part of this production can become object of research; so a complicated question arises, which texts can be considered representative. (2) The reductive approach to the individual style searches for those style traits that are specific only for the given author and tries to fdter out all the other traits. On the other hand, the complex approach conceives the individual style as a modę of selection and organization of the elements of author’s idiolect; thus, also the devices shared with other persons are considered as components of the individual style. (3) The individual style must be viewed as dynamie and changing in time.

Keywords:

individual style, idiosyneratie vs. generic stylistics, representative texts, reductive and complex approach to the individual style, idiolect, identity, ipseity

Ćervenka M., 1991, Individualnistyl a vyznamova stavba literarniho dila. - M. Ćervenka, Styl a vyznam. Studie o basnicich, Praha: Ćeskoslovensky spisovatel, s. 246-262 [1976].

Ćervenka M., 1995, Individualni styl a jeho vyznamova aktivita, „Stylistyka” IV, s. 223-225.

Gray B., 1969, Style. The Problem and its Solution, The Hague - Paris: Mouton.

Grimm Ch., 1991, Zum Mythos Individualstil. Mikrostilistische Untersuchungen zu Thomas Mann, Wiirzburg: Kónigshausen und Neumann.

Gumbrecht H. U., 1986, Schwindende Stabilitdt der Wirklichkeit. Eine Geschichte des Stilbegriffs. — Stil. Geschichten und Funktionen eines kulturwissenschaftlichen Diskurselements, ed. H.U. Gumbrecht, K.L. Pfeiffer, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, s.726-788.

Hassler G., 2009, Stil. — G. Hassler, C. Neis, Lexikon sprachtheoretischer Grundbegriffe des 17. und 18. Jahrhunderts, Berlin - New York: Walter de Gruyter, s. 975-1000.

Hausenblas K., 1991, Neco mało k jazyku a stylu Jana Gebauera. — Slavica Pragensia XXXV. Jan Gebauer. Sbornikk 150. vyroći narozeni, Praha: Karolinum, s. 21-29.

Hausenblas K. 1995, Strućna charakteristika stylu a stylistiky, „Stylistyka” IV, s. 233-243.

Havranek B., 1963, K funkćnimu rozvrstveni spisovneho jazyka. - B. Havranek, Studie o spisovnem jazyce, Praha: Nakladatelstvf ĆSAV, s. 60-68 [1942].

Janković M., 2005, Individualni styl a problematika „smyslu” umeleckeho literarniho dila. — M. Janković, Gesty za smyslem literarniho dila, Praha: Karolinum, s. 127-140 [1976].

Jelinek, M., 2006, Principy rozboru individualnich stylu. — Komunikace — styl - text, ed. A. Jaklova, Ćeske Budejovice: Jihoćeska univerzita, s. 35—40.

Junkova B., 1996, Jazyk komentaru Jiriho Leschtiny. — Spisovnost a nespisovnost dnes, ed. R. Śramek, Brno: Masarykova univerzita v Bme, s. 163-165.98

Lecercle J.-J., 1993, The Current State of Stylistics, „The European English Messenger” II, ć.l, s.14—18.

Lerchner G., 2002, lndividualstil und gesellschaftliche Sprachtatigkeit. — G. Lerchner, Schriften zum Stil. Tbrtrage zur Ehrung Gotthards Lerchners anlasslich seines 65. Geburtstages und Aufsatze des Jubilars, ed. I. Barz, U. Fix, M. Schrbder, Leipzig: Leipziger Universitatsverlag, s. 68-79 [1980].

Lessing G. E., 1996, Anti-Goeze. D. i. notgedrungene Beitrdge zu den freiwilligen Beitragen des Hm. Past. Goeze. - G. E. Lessing, Werke, Bd. 8, ed. H. Góbel. Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, s. 160-308 [1778].

Mukafovsky J., 1948a, Pokus o slohovy rozbor Babićky Bożeny Nemcove. - J. Mukarovsky, Kapitoly z ćeske poetiky II, Praha: Svoboda, s. 311-322 [1925].

Mukafovsky J., 1948b, Masaryk jako stylista. — J. Mukafovsky, Kapitoly z ćeske poetiky II, Praha: Svoboda, s. 422^446 [1932].

Neruda J„ 1951, Knihy baśni, ed. F. Vodićka, Praha: Orbis.Ricoeur P., 1992, Oneself as Another, prel. K. Blamey, Chicago - London: The University of Chicago Press [1990].

Spitzer L., 1961, Stilstudien I, Miinchen: Max Hueber [1928].Tłusty J., 2008, Ricoeurova cesta k narativni identite. - Vypraveni v kontextu, ed. A. Jedlićkova, O. Sladek, Praha: Ustav pro ćeskou literaturu AV ĆR, s. 230-239.

Trabant J., 1986, Der Totaleindruck. Stil der Texte und Charakter der Sprachen. — Stil. Geschichten und Funktionen eines kulturwissenschaftlichen Diskurselements, ed. H. U. Gumbrecht, K. L. Pfeiffer, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp, s. 169-188.

Published
2021-02-02

Cited by

Mareś, P. (2021). Individudlni styl-problem a reśeni. Stylistyka, 20, 91–100. Retrieved from https://czasopisma.uni.opole.pl/index.php/s/article/view/3523

Authors

Petr Mareś 

Statistics

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.


License

Copyright (c) 2011 Stylistyka

Creative Commons License

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

1. Copyrights to published works are held by the University of Opole (to the collective work) and the Authors (to individual parts of the collective work that have an independent meaning).

2. Only previously undistributed works can be published in the scientific journal "Stylistics".

3. The University of Opole does not restrict the possibility of the author's further dissemination of his work on condition that the scientific journal "Stylistics" is indicated as the original place of publication and the consent of the University Publishing House.

4. Consent to the publication of the work in the scientific journal "Stylistics" is tantamount to granting the author a non-exclusive license to the University of Opole, including the right to use the work without territorial restrictions and time limits in the following fields of exploitation:

a) within the scope of recording and multiplication of the work - production of any number of copies of the work in whole or in part using a specified technique, including printing, reprography, magnetic recording and digital technique, introduction of the work into computer memory and computer networks,

b) within the scope of circulation of the original or copies on which the work has been recorded - circulation, lending or hiring of the original or copies,

c) within the scope of dissemination of the work in a manner other than specified in item 2 - making the work or its abstract available on the Internet by enabling the recipients to access the work on-line or enabling them to download the work to their own device that makes it possible to read it, placing the work in electronic databases that disseminate scientific works, including in particular the CEEOL database (Central and Eastern Online Libray) and the abstract in English in the CEJSH database (The Central Europaen Journal of Social Scienes and Humanites).

d) within the scope of creating and distributing dependent works created using the work - using them in the fields of exploitation specified in points 1-3.

5. The author is not entitled to compensation for granting the license to the work.

6. The author agrees that the University may grant further permission to use the work (sublicense) in the fields of exploitation specified in par. 2 paragraph 4.

7. The author agrees that, in connection with the distribution of the work, his or her personal information, that is, name, affiliation, and e-mail address, may be made public.