Problems of phonostylistics 2 страница

If an utterance is qualified as fully spontaneous from linguistic point of view it means that its verbal realization is taking place at the moment of speaking, though, of course, it could be thought over in advance. There are situations where this kind of speech activity is not possible. The reason that accounts for that results from three things: a) the utterance is too long to be remembered because, as we know, there are memory constraints; these are utterances produced in the form of lectures, reports, etc.; b) the time of the speaker is limited, so the message has to be conveyed without any hesitation; for example, news over the radio and TV; c) the speaker is realizing somebody else's utterance, for example, reading a piece of prose, quoting, etc. In the above-mentioned cases the utterance or rather its verbal realization is prepared in advance, i.e. written on a sheet of paper. This script version is used at the moment of production — it is read. This type of presentation is qualified as fully prepared. The speaker may use the written variant just to help himself remember the logic succession of the uttered contents. In this case the speech is also fully prepared. In either of the above-mentioned cases a written text was made with the purpose of being produced orally. It serves as a means of optimization of the process of transmitting the message. This kind of written text should be distinguished from literary written texts which are not to be read aloud though such possibility is not completely excluded. The latter differs from the former in fairly specific organization of lexical and grammatical means which is one of the most important characteristics.

Now if we look upon the degree of spontaneity as a style-modifying factor we should admit that it has a decisive influence on the phonetic organization of an oral text. In other words, the primary distinction that should be drawn is the distinction between two kinds of speech activity, i.e. speaking and reading (speech without and with reference to the written text). This distinction is included by most phoneticians into the set of influencing factors no matter what aspect of speech is analysed. Actually the two kinds of oral texts differ quite considerably in the way the phonetic means of the language are used. If we want to describe the difference we would have to admit this is where phonetics overlaps with psycholinguistics, a new interdisciplinary subject.

Psycholinguistics as a distinct area of science developed in early sixties though the contact of linguistics and psychology is known to have lasted for more than a hundred years. Language is considered to be an instrument of human psychics and so information from psychology plays an important and practically useful part in the development of linguistics.

It is true that investigation of speech cannot be carried out without considering the structure and organization of activities due to which production and perception of speech take place, the latter being psycholinguistics study area. Language is known to be a human activity. Any human activity can exist in two forms, i.e. in the form of the process and in the form of the product as the result of the process. So it is perfectly clear that it is impossible to interpret phonetic characteristics of living speech without having an idea of the psychic laws of speech perception and speech production.

Before we go on to describing phonetic characteristics of the above-mentioned kinds of speech realizations we would like to give an idea, a very sketchy one, of what these two processes are like.

The point is that speaking and reading being processes of communication and varieties of speech activity are two different psychic processes, i.e. the sounding utterance is generated in quite different ways. When a written text is being read aloud, a reader has got a verbal realization before his eyes, the script which has been prepared in advance either by himself or by another person. So he need not think of what to say or rather of how to put the ideas into words. The only thing he has to do is to make the graphic symbols sound, i.e. to realize orally the ideas verbally expressed by means of lexics and grammar of the language. Oral realization should be made according to pronunciation rules of a particular language. Besides, if he is to read with comprehension the graphic symbols of the language he must learn to supply those portions of the signals which are not in the graphic representation themselves. He must supply the significant stresses, pauses and tone sequences. In short, the reader should learn to use the phonetic means of a language to be able to express the ideas of the written text adequately. If he has acquired this sort of habit, psychologically he is quite sure of what he is going to produce. As a result the usage of phonetic means is characterized by a very high degree of regularity. Melodic, temporal, rhythmic organization of the text is even; pauses are made at syntactical junctures within and between the sentences. The text sounds loud and distinct (both sounds and intonation* are meant).

While spontaneous speech is taking place (when no notes are used) the process of psychic activity consists of two equally important items, i.e. a) the process of searching (remembering) information and the ways of expressing it verbally and b) the process of giving (transmitting) information. The speaker has got an intention to express some ideas and he should choose an adequate linguistic form to express these ideas and in this way to generate the utterance.

Naturally the psychic mechanisms of generating the spoken utterances are quite different. Consequently, phonetic means of the language are also used differently, the difference being the marker of the form of speech activity.

Analysing most important characteristics of a spoken spontaneous text we should first of all mention a phenomenon called hesitation. The point is that while generating a text a speaker has no time or rather not enough time to make sure of the correct form of the expression he has chosen, because he is simultaneously planning what he is going to say next and also monitoring what he is saying. The wording is taking place simultaneously with pronouncing. Consequently, the speaker hesitates. He hesitates to remember a further piece of information, to choose a correct word, a correct grammar structure and so on. This hesitation phenomenon breaks the regularity and evenness of phonetic form. There appear micropauses, pauses of different length and quality which seldom occur at the syntactic juncture; lengthening of sounds within the words and in the word final position. A spontaneous text is characterized by a number of relevant features both on segmental and suprasegmental levels: various kinds of assimilation, reduction, elision which manifest simplification of sound sequences; uneven rhythm, fragments melody contour, abundance of pauses, varying loudness (from very loud to very low), narrow range of voice, varying tempo (from very fast to very slow).

Among the features distinguishing the two described kinds of speech realization there is one that needs a more detailed description. That is the delimitation. In reading pauses occur at the syntactic junctures, so an intonation group coincides with what is called a "syntagm(a)". In a spontaneous text hesitating often prevents the speaker from realizing a full syntagm(a). There may appear a hesitation pause which breaks it, so an intonation group does not coincide with a syntagm(a). Pauses at the end of the phrase are often optional, because the speaker does not realize the rules of phrasing, i.e. of making pauses at the moment of speaking. For example:

Many slang words are invented to cover new situations... which people feel that the traditional type of words doesn't cover... phrases that you often find among the teenagers today... They want to have new styles of dress, new hair styles... and... they want to call it something, their own words so that they can identify it in a group.

Summarizing we may say that all the above-mentioned features may be referred to as the main phonetic markers of a spontaneous text. It should be borne in mind that phonetic peculiarities are noticeable together with specific grammatical, mainly syntactical, structures of the utterance.

In teaching English, especially spoken English, one should be well aware of specific phonetic markers of living speech. They are its integral and most natural characteristics. A student of English should be specially taught such peculiarities. Otherwise a spoken text would sound like a read one which would be unnatural and wrong.

Summarizing briefly we may say. that we have tried to describe the main extralinguistic situational factors that make the language user choose the appropriate code of phonetic realization of the generated text. The ones that are proposed here are not all that need to be considered. They will, however, form a temporary framework for the description of phonetic styles. We should point out here that their role as style-modifying factors is different. Some of them, spontaneity, for example, play the decisive role, others, for example, the number of listeners, seem to have less marking power. The idea that should be realized is that in everyday life situations all of them are interconnected and interdependent and it is normally the combination of several of them that determines the style.

We have established so far that certain non-linguistic features can be correlated with variations of phonetic means. Now we turn to discuss what patterns of variation are interpreted by the listener as modifying a given utterance. In other words what perceptional characteristics of an oral text should be considered to have a style-differentiating value. Here we should note that while comparing things or phenomena we are first of all attracted by differentiating features while common characteristics are taken for granted.

It may be well to begin with a special voice colouring which is sometimes called speech tamber. The speaker's attitude to the communicative situation, to what he is saying, the relationships of the partners are revealed by tamber. Tamber combined with non-verbal system of communication, kinesic system, is a marker of some specific attitude, or emotion which would be a permanent characteristic of a language user in a given communicative act.

Delimitation is another characteristic which is commonly referred to as a style-differentiating feature on the perceptive level. As was mentioned earlier, it is the extralinguistic factors, mostly of psycholinguistic character, that determine the laws and phonetic means of delimitation. Among the latter pauses should be considered and described independently.

There are different patterns of phonetic delimitation of an oral text. The terms most often referred to denote fragments of speech continuum into which the whole text is naturally divided are as follows: a phonopassage (in monologues), a semantic block (in dialogues), a phrase, an intonation group.

A third characteristic which is usually referred to the set of style-differentiating ones is the accentuation of semantic centres. By semantic centres we mean parts of the utterance that have a considerable value in realization of functional utterance perspective, i.e. in expressing the main contents of the utterance. It is for the most part intonation that permits to do this. Intonation marks those parts of the utterance contrasting them to the rest of the text. The degree of contrast can vary, the variable being the marker of the style. For example, in spontaneous speech the contrast between accented and non-accented segments of an utterance is greater than in reading, due to the fact that in speech the unaccented elements are pronounced at a lower pitch.

In describing phonetic style-differentiating characteristics (both on segmental and suprasegmental level) we would have to deal with a certain amount of notions such as variations of pitch direction, pitch range, pitch level, loudness, tempo (which includes both pauses and speech rate), rhythm and some others, the meaning of which will become clear as the book proceeds.

Talking about style-differentiating means of phonetic level we should remember that their usage is no aim in itself. Phonetic means of the language in interacting with lexics and grammar optimize the process of realization of ideas by verbal means.

Now that we have described style-forming factors and style-differentiating characteristics it seems logical enough to give a bird's eye view on the problem of classification of phonetic styles.

It would be an oversimplification to say that there is a classification admitted by most analysts. However, there is one thing that stands out clearly: while classifying various speech realizations from phonostylistic point of view an analyst should single out criteria that are different from the ones used as a basis for distinguishing functional styles of language. We make it clear by means of an example. We might suggest that various speech realizations can be grouped on the basis of some most general common phonetic characteristics. Thus such speech realizations as informative reading over radio and TV, a text produced behind the screen, lectures, reports, etc. can be grouped together since they are monologues with reference to written texts. From the point of view of functional stylistics they are referred to different styles: reading over the radio is qualified as a text belonging to the functional sphere of publicistics, while a lecture is referred to scientific functional style. So we may see that the kinds of oral texts traditionally referred to different functional styles are characterized by common phonetic features.

There could be brought about examples of the opposite kind. Texts that are traditionally referred to different functional styles turn out to have identical phonetic organization. For example, the phonetic experiments carried out recently show that texts belonging to different functional styles (an extract from prose — an extract from a guide for tourists) read with identical pragmatic aim do not reveal any difference in phonostylistic aspect.

Among the well-known classifications of phonetic styles we would like to mention the following two. One of them belongs to S.M.Gaiduchic. He distinguishes five phonetic styles: solemn (торжественный), scientific business (научно-деловой), official business (официально-деловой), everyday (бытовой), and familiar (непринужденный). As we may see the above-mentioned phonetic styles on the whole correlate with functional styles of the language. -They are differentiated on the basis of spheres of discourse. The other way of classifying phonetic styles is suggested by J.A.Dubovsky who discriminates the following five styles: informal ordinary, formal neutral, formal official, informal familiar, and declamatory. The division is based on different degrees of formality or rather familiarity between the speaker and the listener. Within each style subdivisions are observed. But as the author himself writes it is rather the principle of presenting the texts for description and analysis because "no theory has yet created a completely symmetrical classification of speech acts" (14, p. 6).

Our approach is slightly different. When we consider the problem of classifying phonetic styles according to the criteria described above we should distinguish so far between segmental and suprasegmental level of analysis because some of them (the aim of the utterance, for example) result in variations of mainly suprasegmental level, while others (the formality of situation, for example) reveal segmental varieties. So for the sake of describing and explaining phonostylistic varieties it seems preferable to consider each level separately until a more adequate system of correlation is found.

The style-differentiating characteristics mentioned above give good grounds for establishing intonational styles suitable not only for sociolinguistic research but also for the purpose of learning and teaching a foreign language.

It might be generally assumed that there are five intonational styles singled out mainly according to the purpose of communication and to which we could refer all the main varieties of the texts generated in everyday communication of a modern man. They are as follows:

1. Informational style.

2. Academic style (Scientific).

3. Publicistic style (Oratorial).

4. Declamatory style (Artistic).

5. Conversational style (Familiar).

But differentiation of intonation according to the purpose of communication only is definitely not enough. As was mentioned above, there are other factors that affect intonation in various ex-tralinguistic situations.

We could add that any style with very little exception is seldom realized in its pure form. Each generated text is likely to include phonetic characteristics of different styles. In such cases we talk about overlapping (fusion) of styles.

To summarize we could say that the distinction of phonetic styles is a purely formal one because any particular theory while in use should control and give meaning to the descriptive statement. So in this respect the suggested classification is near to adequate way of reflecting numerous speech realizations, on the one hand, and on the other, it is the way to understand and interpret the system. If we attempted to systematize all our observations and account for all the options the task would prove daunting. What we need to do in teaching is simply to call attention to the most marked features of the style ignoring the relatively stable features.

We might conclude by saying that we hope this will be a useful piece of knowledge for a learner because both the foreign student and the would-be teacher of English need to develop the awareness of different phonetic styles of the language. He should be taught to analyse and describe the speaking habits of English people. He should learn to discover the patterns which differentiate style varieties to explain as far as possible why people speak in a certain way and to determine what form of phonetic expression they may choose because the style should be as natural as dress and fit the time, the place and the person. Besides he should be able to teach other people the same things because teaching a spoken foreign language means teaching the ability to communicate, the art of communication being part of the individual's culture. It is for this reason that this textbook includes this chapter. The chapters that follow will be based on the idea that stylistic differentiation of oral speech cannot be ignored in teaching both a foreign language and a mother tongue.

Дата добавления: 2015-05-31