3)Functional Style. Register.

(Arnold) Functional style (FS) – is a subsystem of the language, which has its specific peculiarities in lexis, phraseology, syntax, and sometimes in phonetics. Existence of FSs is accounted for by peculiarities of the conditions of the communication in different spheres of communication. It is worth mentioning that FSs differ not only in their ability or inability to use some elements and constructions, but also in their frequency. The term FS seems to be very precise, because the style (the choice of a particular linguistic means) depends on the function of the language in a certain sphere of communication. According to Arnold, register –is narrower than a FS, it combines the situation of communication, written or spoken form of communication and the role structure of communication. For example, registers can be: the register of the advertisement, register of the meteorological forecast, so on. She compares it to the Russian term sublanguage –a subsystem that satisfies the needs and the aims of the communication. FS is like a characterization of the sublanguages; and it consists of the specific constituents of the sublanguages.

(Lecture) Language is intrinsically multifunctional. Even the simplest utterance conveys more than one kind of meaning. The brunch of Ss that studies the use of language in certain context and functional varieties of language is called functional Ss. Functional style – is a selection of language elements and their syntagmatic arrangement to fulfill a certain function and characterized by uniformity, regularity, and conformity to certain grammar and dictionary convention. It becomes standard for the speaker in a certain sphere of communication in a certain consequences.

A FS is a subsystem of language elements and their arrangement, that has a conventional nature.

A convention – is what is traditionally said in a certain community under certain circumstances. This presupposes the existence of other subsystems or other FSs. FSs are in distributional oppositions (like allomorphs). Variability of language allows to fulfill metalingual function, allows the l-ge be flexible and effective means of communication, to make it possible in all geographic and social circumstances at different periods of time.

FS is characterized by general usage, traditional realization; it is compulsory, stable, it is a certain model, a norm for a certain situation, a standard, the universal phenomenon, which is represented by the whole complex of generally used traditional realization of the language. It is received as to the range and limits of its variations.

Register – is a further differentiation, where l-ge is differentiated according to the speech situation itself ((1) context, (2) addresser (sender), (3) addressee (receiver), (4) contact, (5) common code and (6) message). Variability arises from and serves the speech situation (SP). Variation among l-ge and within l-ge makes communication and the l-ge non-accidental. There are 3 dimensions of variability: 2 of place (social, geographic) and 1 of time.

By taking the speaker as an invariable element in overlapping situations and discussing how he adjusts his language to the situation we identify FS/registers. Since a speaker’s choice may be governed by 1 of the 3 main elements:1) his own role; 2)a number and status of his hearers ; 3) particular circumstances which direct him to speak or write, we have 3 main ranges of variation in register according to which of these elements is dominant. The 1^st defines the range of technicality, the 2^nd – the range of formality, and the 3d determines whether the speaker or writer is within an audible range (spoken/written). A variation can be identified as register by more than 1 range of variation at a time. Register is often specialist register.

(Galperin) Each functional style of the literary language makes use of language means the interrelation of which is peculiar to the given FS. It is the coor­dination of language media and SDs which shapes the distinctive features of each style, and not the separate language media or the SDs themselves. Each FS however, can be recognized by one or more leading, especially conspicuous features. For instance, the use of special terminology is a lexical characteristic of the FSof scientific prose, and one by which it can easily be recognized.

The development of each style is predetermined by the changes in the norms of Standard English

An FS is a patterned variety of literary text characterized by the greater or lesser typification of its constituents, supra-phrasal units (SPU), in which the choice and arrangement of interdependent and interwoven language media are calculated to secure the purport of the communication.

Each FS is a relatively stable system at the given stage in the development of the literary language, but it changes, and sometimes considerably, from one period to another. Therefore functional style of language is a historical category. It is also greatly influenced by changing social conditions, the progress of science and the development of cultural life in the country.

4)Classifications of Functional Styles. The Development of the English Literary Language.

(Galperin) According to Galperin: Functional Style is a system of interrelated language means serving a definite aim in communication. It is the coordination of the language means and stylistic devices which shapes the distinctive features of each style and not the language means or stylistic devices themselves. Each style, however, can be recoquized by one or more leading features which are especially conspicuous. For instance the use of special terminology is a lexical characteristics of the style of scientific prose, and one by which it can easily be recognized.

Classification: 1. The Belles - Lettres Functional Style. a) poetry; b) emotive prose; c) drama; 2. Publicistic Functional Style, a) oratory; b) essays; c) articles in newspapers and magazines; 3. The Newspaper Functional Style. a) brief news items; b) advertisments and announcements; c) headlines; 4. The Scientific Prose Style. a) exact sciences; b) humanitarian sciences; c) popular- science prose; 5. The Official Documents Functional Style. a) diplomatic documents; b) business letters; c) military documents; d) legal documents; This classification is by no means arbitrary. Other schemes may possibly be elaborated and highlighted by different approaches to the functional style. Some stylists consider that newspaper articles should be classed under the newspaper style, not under the language of publicistic literature. Any classification should lead to some kind of simplification of the facts classified, because items are considered in isolation. When analyzing concrete texts, we discover that the boundaries between them sometimes become less and less discernible.

(Kuharenko) All scholars agree that a well developed language, such as English, is streamed into several functional styles. Their classifications, though, coincide only partially: most style theoreticians do not argue about the number of functional styles being five, but disagree about their nomenclature. This manual offers one of the rather widely accepted classifications which singles out the following functional styles:

1. official style, represented in all kinds of official documents and papers;

2. scientific style, found in articles, brochures, monographs and other scientific and academic publications;

3. publicist style, covering such genres as essay, feature article, most writings of “new journalism”, public speeches, etc.;

4. newspaper style, observed in the majority of information materials printed in newspapers;

5. belles-lettres style, embracing numerous and versatile genres of imaginative writing.

It is only the first three that are invariably recognized in all stylistic treatises. As to the newspaper style, it is often regarded as part of the publicist domain and is not always treated individually. But the biggest controver-sy is flaming around the belles-lettres style. The unlimited possibilities of creative writing, which covers the whole of the universe and makes use of all language resources, led some scholars to the conviction that because of the liability of its contours, it can be hardly qualified as a functional style. Still others claim that, regardless of its versatility, the belles-lettres style, in each of its concrete representations, fulfils the aesthetic function, which fact singles this style out of others and gives grounds to recognize its systematic uniqueness, i.e. charges it with the status if an autonomous functional style. To compare different views on the number of functional styles and their classification see corresponding chapters in stylistic monographs, reference- and textbooks.

The Development of The English Literary Language. The English literary language has had a long and peculiar history. (Lecture) Standard English (SE) – the speech proper to the educated class. It is a historical category. National language goes hand in hand with the nation (the consolidation of the nation, 2nd half of the 13 century). The state demanded the national language (London an Southerner dialect). To write literature, to issue laws, for education, government and church – standard language was needed. At the end of the 18 century standard language was formed, it became fixed and regularized (before that spelling was irregular, grammar experimental, lexis uncertain (a lot of dialects). Samuel Johnson created the dictionary, which fixed meaning and later pronunciation), appeared grammar books (conformity of the use of the grammar rules). Language became the test of the culture; it could be understood through time and space by all people.

(Galperin) 3-5 century - of the integration of the tribal dialects of the Angles, Saxon and Jutes who occupied the British Isles

8 century – the 1^st manuscripts of the language.

8-12 century - Anglo-Saxon or Old English. Old English is a dead language, like Latin or classic Greek, it is inflected.

13-15 century - Middle English period, it had greatly enlarged its vocabulary by borrowings from Norman-French and other languages. The structure of the language had considerably changed due to the loss of most of the inflections and also to other very important changes. By the middle of the thirteenth century Norman-French, which had been the official language since the Norman Conquest in 1066, was almost completely ousted by English.

15 century - New English period. This period cannot yet be characterized by any degree of uniformity in the language. The influence of the various dialects was still strongly felt, but the London dialect was gradually winning general recognition.

16 century – appearance of literary English. The factors influencing the development of literary English in the 15th and 16th centuries: 1) A common interest in classical literature during the Renaissance and hence the application of classical grammar, spelling and rhetoric to the English language. Attempts were made by scholars to force the norms into the English language. 2) A desire to keep the language pure, to retain and revive old English words and as far as possible old English morphological and syntactical forms. This tendency has been called archaic purism. 3) An orientation towards the living, developing and rapidly changing norms of the colloquial language.

17 century - English dictionaries began to appear as practical guides to the use of new words, terms belonging to science. 17th century English is characterized by general tendency to refinement and regulation. The orientation towards classical models assumed a new function, that of refining, polishing and improving the literary language. This was one of the trends leading to the final establishment of norms of literary English.

18 century - conscious goal: to fix the language for all times, to establish its laws once and for all. Order and regularity were the qualities they esteemed.

19 century. Main tendencies: 1) purism (early 19 cent) especially to vocabulary and pronunciation.2) colloquial English was recognized as a variety of the national language; 3) a more or less firmly established differentiation of styles. By this period the shaping of the newspaper style, the publicistic style, the style of scientific prose and the official style may be said to have been completed and language scholars found themselves faced with new problems. It became necessary to seek the foundation and distinctive characteristics of each functional style of language and analyze them. The realistic tendencies and trends in English literature during this period made it necessary to introduce non-literary forms of English when depicting characters from the so-called lower classes through the idiosyncrasies of their speech; 4) more liberal admission of dialectal worlds and words from the Scottish dialect in particular. To" a considerable extent this must be attributed to Robert Burns, whose poems were widely read and admired and who, as is known, wrote in the Scottish (Scots) dialect.

In summing up the main features of the struggle to establish norms for 19th century literary English, special mention must be made of the two tendencies characteristic of this period. One was reactionary purism, the principles of which were laid down in the 17th and 18th centuries and which became manifest in the struggle against any innovation no matter where it came from. The other tendency was to draw on the inexhaustible resources of the vernacular both in vocabulary and in the lively syntactical patterns of colloquial English so suggestive of the warm intonation of the human voice. This tendency was particularly observable in the belles-lettres style of language and Byron, Thackeray and Dickens contributed greatly to the enrichment of the literary language. The end of the century led practically to no change in the general direction of the two tendencies. But there is undoubted evidence that the second of the two above-mentioned tendencies has taken the upper hand. The recognition in the 20th century 'of the everyday speech of the people as a variety of the national language has done much to legalize the colloquial form of English which, until the present century had been barred from the domain of language studies. We must point out that the functional styles of language have shaped themselves within the literary form of the English language. The division of the Standard English language into two varieties, written and spoken (the literary language and the colloquial language), which was recognized earlier and which was acknowledged as a natural coexistence, now goes alongside the problem of the "closed" systems of styles of language.