Actual problems of phono-stylistics

For want of a nail, the shoe was lost,
For want of the shoe, the horse was lost,
For want of the horse, the rider was lost
For want of the rider, the battle was lost
For want of the battle, the kingdom was lost
And all from the want of a horseshoe nail.
This example is interesting in many respects. First of all it demonstrates all types of repetition — anaphora, epiphora, chain repetition, framing, and anadiplosis. Then it promotes the thematic development of the text. And finally, it is a mechanism of shaping text as such.
Developing the topic of stylistic cohesion we cannot help mentioning the role of stylistic devices, especially symbol. As is known, symbol is a trope functioning in the literary texts as a poly-conceptual structure, and assuming various stylistic functions (Джусупов, 2006). At the same time, it is necessary to underline its text-forming function because symbolic meanings appear in the text on the basis of frequently repeated key notions. Here are some examples:
Rain — a symbol of unhappiness, loneliness and sufferings in the works by E. Hemingway;
Sandcastle - a symbol of illusive love and unreal dreams (А. Murdock); _:
Oak tree - a symbol of powerful England (J.Galsworthy);
White monkey - a symbol of spiritual bankruptcy (J. Galsworthy³⁴).
CONCLUSION

Since the emergence in the 1960s of English Language as a university subject in its own right, the relationship between the study of literature and the study of language has often been one of bitter rivalry. Literary critics have railed against the ‘cold’, ‘scientific’ approach used by scholars of language in their analyses of literary texts, whilst linguists have accused their literary colleagues of being too vague and subjective in the analyses they produced.

Nowhere is this disagreement more clearly seen than in the clash between Bateson and Fowler (see Fowler 1971), which, although useful in terms of raising the issues involved, had the unfortunate effect of dragging the debate down to the level of personal insult. Fowler’s famous question to Bateson asking him whether he would allow his sister to marry a linguist represents, perhaps, the nadir of this particular argument. The relationship between literature and language, then, has, for the most part, been an unhappy one, and this is unfortunate since undoubtedly scholars in both disciplines have much to learn from one another. My aim in this article is to show how it is possible to bridge the divide between language and literature by using the analytical techniques available within the sub-discipline of language study known as stylistics³⁵.
Stylistics, sometimes called linguo-stylistics, is a branch of general linguistics. It has now been more or less definitely outlined. It deals mainly with two interdependent tasks: a) the investigation of the inventory of special language media which by their ontological features secure the desirable effect of the utterance and b) cer­tain types of texts (discourse) which due to the choice and arrangement of language means are distinguished by the pragmatic aspect of the communication. The two objectives of stylistics are clearly discernible as two separate fields of investigati