Education of the republic of uzbekistan samarkand state institute

CHAPTER I A BRIEF NOTE ABOUT LINGUISTIC AND LITERARY STYLISTICS
1.1Characteristics of linguistic stylistics
Linguistic stylistics, on the other hand, looks for style in terms of a text's linguistic features at various levels of linguistic description, such as phonology (onomatopoeia, alliteration, eye dialect, and rhyme), syntax (repetition, and question in the narrative), grammar (dialect), and sematics (metaphor, irony, and simile). It identifies the writer's "choices" and the "effects" they
It is likewise worried about the uantification of these highlights and their repeat in a scholarly text. As a result, linguistic stylistics appears to be more objective than literary stylistics because it employs scientific methods. While it does not disregard the text's meaning, it places more emphasis on linguistic description than on interpretation.
In such manner, accepts that the lingustic investigation of artistic text is "exact and unmistakable" as it utilizes objective logical techniques and understanding of texts". This viewpoint is consistent with what Jakobson said: I privately believe that the poetic incompetence of some bigoted linguists has been mistaken for an inadequacy of the linguistic science itself if there are still critics who doubt the ability of linguistics to embrace the field of poetry. But we are all aware that a linguist who ignores the poetic function of language and a literary scholar who ignores linguistic issues and is unfamiliar with linguistic methods are both flagrant anachronisms. The formal analysis of style and its variations in writing and speech is commonly referred to as stylistics. It's hard to say exactly what stylistics is because of its complicated history and the many different topics that have been researched. However, Babajide (2000:123) states that the most basic definition of stylistics is the study of styles. In a separate section of this chapter, style has been extensively discussed. Therefore, style is essential and central to stylistics research. It is regarded as a logical extension of literary criticism's early twentieth-century focus on studying texts rather than their authors. Even though it was created in the 20th century, stylistics has evolved from its formalist beginnings to the contextualized, discourse-based approaches that are used today.
As indicated by Gem and Davy (1969: vi) For a number of decades, stylistics has been regarded as a controversial and development-focused field of study. It is a field of study that is not only very diverse but also very interdisciplinary (Hoffmannová, 1997: 5), despite being a relatively new idea. Stylistics frequently meets with different areas of etymology like Authentic Semantics,
Dialectology, Sociolinguistics, Psycholinguistics and numerous others. This, maybe, is one explanation
why the discipline of Expressive Examination is so valuable. It can be used to address a wide range of issues. All of these fields are subfields of language study; therefore, they should be viewed as complementary tools from the same set (Enkvist, 1973: 19).
As per Gem (2003:460), stylistics is a part of etymology which concentrates on the highlights of
situationally particular purposes of language. It attempts to lay out standards fit for representing
specific decisions by individual and gatherings in their utilization of language. Different kinds of language use are used in different situations. Stylists attempt to establish principles that can account for the particular choices that individuals and social groups make when using language (written or spoken) in this way. It is the study of individual or group characteristics of systematic variation in language use, also known as style (Crystal: 2003).
However, the fundamental focus of linguistic stylistics is the investigation of a text's grammar, lexis, semantics, phonological properties, and other discourse devices. This stylistic approach differs from sociolinguistic analysis in that sociolinguistics goes further and takes into account factors like age, gender, social class, and educational status as factors that influence individual choices.
Stylistics is what could be compared to the German stylistik and French stylistique (a part of
phonetics that reviews style). Stylistics was established in the UK and the United States in the 1960s. It has utilized various linguistics-wide models and terminologies. According to Arthur (1992), stylistics delves into generative grammar with an emphasis on "deviant" usage and, more recently, discourse analysis and pragmatics.
Stylistics and the idea of style are discussed in Crystal (1996, 2003) and many other works. The study of systematic variation in language use (style) characteristic of individuals or groups is referred to as stylistics. Crystal posed the question of how we might approach the task of separating and identifying the linguistic characteristics that make up a person's style. Importantly, we might need to inquire about what style is. We wish to repeat that the style of an individual is pretty much as special as his fingerprints (Ullman, 1973).
This assumes that a person's style is their identity—a characteristic by which they can be distinguished from other people. An overall trademark is intended for this
individual. However, despite the fact that fingerprints do not change, a person's style may change depending on their purpose, audience, situation, subject, etc. Ullman stated that style is a man's personality. It is the mind's physiognomy.
Style is both essential and central to the study of stylistics if stylistics is the study of styles (Babajide, 2000). Thus, an elucidation of the idea is fundamental. Style is typically as complex and diverse as stylistics itself, as we will see in the following section. This is because people have different opinions about these ideas.
Because it has multiple definitions, it can be deduced from the preceding that stylistics is just as difficult to define as style.
i. Stylistics is the field of study that studies how readers interact with textual language to understand how we comprehend and are influenced by texts (Khader) ii. According to Mukherjee (iii), stylistics is the description and investigation of the variety of linguistic forms utilized in actual speech. Stylistics has traditionally been thought of as a field of study that investigates the selection and application of linguistic, extra-linguistic, or artistic expressive tools and means in the communication process (Missikova, iv). Stylistics is a branch of linguistics that studies style in a scientific and systematic way regarding the manners/linguistic features of various varieties of language at various levels (Mistrik v.). Stylistics can be defined as the study of choice and the types of use of linguistic, extralinguistic, and aesthetic means as well as specific communication techniques.
vi. The study of style is the focus of the stylistics subfield of linguistics, which employs contemporary linguistic theory and methods.
Style is evidently the recurring idea in the study of stylistics. Overall, the term "stylistics" can be used to figure out how a particular language's form and effects are related to one another. It sees what is 'going on' inside the language particularly in
connection to what the semantic affiliations are that the style of language uncovers.
As a reasonable discipline, stylistics endeavors to lay out the rules that are able to do
making sense of specific decisions that are made by the people and gatherings in their utilization of
language. These options fall roughly into two categories: First, a decision is made based on the company that a word keeps. This is on the pivot of chain, in fact alluded to as the syntagmatic
pivot. It demonstrates, horizontally, the function of each word in relation to another word in the group to readers or listeners. Primarily, this structure determines a sentence's grammaticality. This often takes care of words' collocability, especially when it comes to tense, person, number, polarity, and other factors.
Two, paradigmatic connection is a connection that holds between components of a similar classification which
is components that can be fill in for one another. The axis of choice, or choice at the level of substitution, is the paradigmatic axis. It is conversely, with syntagmatic connection, which applies to
relations that hold between components that are joined with one another. In structuralist linguistics, the distinction between "paradigmatic" and "syntagmatic" relations is a significant classification.
Louis Hjelmslev first used the term "paradigmatic relation" in his writings. For what Hjelmslev referred to as a "paradigmatic relation," Ferdinand de Saussure, who established the divergence between the two types of relations in structuralist linguistics, used the term "associative relation."
In general, stylistics can be defined as the study of the style of language usage in various linguistic or situational contexts. Stylistics is the cutting edge adaptation of manner of speaking. Rhetoric taught students how to structure an argument, use figures of speech effectively, and generally structure and vary a speech or piece of writing to have the greatest impact on the reader or listener. Technically, stylistics is the study of a literary text's linguistic features, including the phonological, lexical, and syntactic features that have a direct impact on a word's meaning. Because stylists always work with texts, the field of stylistics is often referred to as a fusion of literature and linguistics. When using the textual method of analysis to analyze texts, linguists are referred to as stylisticians.
Stylistics examines oral and written texts to identify essential linguistic properties, structures, and patterns that affect how texts are perceived. It examines phonological properties, discursive devices, semantics, grammar, lexis, and other aspects of language.
In linguistics, stylistic analysis is the process of identifying usage patterns in writing and speech.
It aims to investigate the guiding principles that can explain the particular choices that individuals and social groups make regarding the use of language. Stylistics relies on the
devices given by the hypothetical phonetics to concentrate on in subtleties the highlights of a section, for example,
guidance, data and influence (Zulfiqar, ND). Others are order, direct location,
numbered focuses specialized terms and outline. Because it is so useful, stylistic analysis can be applied to a wide range of topics.
Jakobson demonstrates that linguistics can employ "poetics," or stylistics, and contribute as much to the interpretation of a text as literary criticism does. Literary stylistics, on the other hand, appears to be subjective, whereas linguistic stylistics typically adheres to the scientific method of objectivity.
Literary stylistics, which is based on intuition, subjectivity, and personal interpretation, necessitates artistic talent as well as a taste for language use, to summarize the discussion of linguistic and literary stylistics.
As a result, it focuses on how the reader engages with the text and intuitively comes up with new interpretations. However, intuitions are individual efforts to comprehend the text's meaning, and one can assume as many interpretations as readers. On the other hand, linguistic stylistics seems to treat the text coldly and more scientifically than it actually does, excluding the work's emotional sense.
As a result, stylistics unifies the two approaches linguistic stylistics and literary stylistics as well as the two disciplines linguistics and literary criticism language and literature.

2. 
   Features of literary stylistics
   

Using linguistic concepts and categories, literary stylistics examines the language of literature to explain how specific language choices and patterning—the linguistic foregrounding—in the text create literary meanings. Subjective interpretation is an inextricable component of such textual analysis, despite the fact that stylistics has occasionally claimed to be objective, replicable, inspectable, falsifiable, and rigorous—thereby quasi-scientific. However, the most effective stylistic analyses are systematic, explicit in their procedures and argumentation, testable by independent researchers, and they successfully demonstrate direct relations between prominent linguistic forms and patterns in a text and the meanings or effects readers experience. Stylistics is a branch of linguistics and literary studies that has occasionally been shunned by both, despite predictions for decades that it would disappear. The exact opposite has occurred; There are proponents of stylistics who argue that it provides more authentic and relevant literary studies than most university literature departments offer. In a similar vein, some stylisticians consider their work to be a more focused, coherent linguistics than the majority of the abstract linguistics pursued by academic linguists. The creation of large corpora of languages in digital, machine-searchable form and the adoption and adaptation of ideas from cognitive linguistics have both contributed to the revival of stylistics in recent years. Cognitive stylistics and corpus stylistics in various forms have emerged as a result of these two developments. In the early many years of the 21st hundred years, one of the most astonishing strands of work in stylistics is investigating sorts of iconicity in abstract texts: phrases of language that appear to carry out the effects or meanings that the text is trying to convey.
Verdonk as he would see it puts it that style doesn't emerge out of a vacuum rather, its creation, reason, and impact are profoundly implanted in the specific setting in which both the essayist and the peruser of the text assume their particular parts. In addition, he asserts that the critic ought to be able to distinguish between the two kinds of context: context, both linguistic and non-linguistic. What then, at that point, is the distinction? The surrounding features of language within a text, such as typography, sounds, words, phrases, and sentences, that are relevant to the interpretation of other such linguistic elements are referred to as the linguistic context. He also thinks that the nonlinguistic context is a much more complicated concept because it could include any number of text external features that affect a text's language and style. As a result, stylistics analysis focuses on a wide range of general characteristics of language, such as diction, sentence patterns, structure and variety, paragraph structure, imagery, repetition, emphasis, and other devices that link ideas together.
There are some similarities between stylistics, literary criticism, and practical criticism. Stylistics examines and describes the text's formal characteristics, or levels of expression in relation to its content, to highlight their practical significance for interpreting the work. The literary critic and the stylistician both rely on intuition and interpretive skills, but the stylistician avoids vague and impressionistic judgments Isidore, [4,78]. It is possible to draw the conclusion from the preceding that the stylist uses both subjective and objective evidences. Subjective evidence refers to the stylistician's intuitions and interpretive abilities (in this regard, as previously mentioned, there is a similarity between a literary critic and a stylistician). Objective evidence comes from examining the form of a text's language; there is no room for intuition here, and this objective evidence can be regarded as a foundation that prevents ambiguous and incorrect interpretations. Nkopuruk and Odusina's view is supported by this assertion (2019). According to them, Objectivity holds that a critic's observations and analyses should always be supported by concrete linguistic evidence rather than an intuitive response. A definition of the terms linguistic stylistics and literary stylistics provided by Isidore can clear up any confusion that may have arisen from this assertion: The scientific study of style is stylistics. Literary stylistics can be defined as a study that relies heavily on external correlates without paying any attention to the "rules guiding the operation of the language." What we refer to as linguistic stylistics is the opposite of this premise (i.e., a study that heavily relies on the rules governing the operation of the language in the explication of a literary text) [5,36].
As a result, there are basically two categories of stylistics: linguistic and literary stylistics Diverse evidence is required for making a decision. Two types of evidence—internal evidence and external evidence—can assist us in making an appropriate interpretation of a literary text. Therefore, both external and internal evidence are required for stylistic interpretation of a text. Isidore's definition above indicates that linguistics research can use internal evidence while literary stylistics research can use external evidence. In conclusion, literary and linguistic stylistics should both be taken into consideration when conducting a stylistically appropriate interpretation analysis.
In addition, Enkvist makes the observation that linguistic stylistics is distinct from literary criticism, which places a premium on brilliant intuitions and elegant, frequently metaphorical, verbalizations of subjective responses. "What is stylistics and why are they saying such terrible things about it?" by Stanley E. Fish According to Essays in Modern Stylistics: The subjectivity and imprecision of literary studies inspired stylistics. Stylists claim to substitute precise and rigorous linguistic descriptions for the appreciative raptures of the impressionistic critic and to proceed from those descriptions to interpretations they claim to be objective. Stylistics, to put it plainly, is an endeavor to put analysis consistently. In general, the search for matter and style in a literary work of art is the focus of both linguistic stylistics and literary criticism. Stylists, like literary critics, are interested in how well a work communicates its message. Literary criticism and linguistic stylistics both rigorously analyze and synthesize a work of art with the common goal of presenting the work's strengths and weaknesses and elucidating it. Despite the similarities that exist between literary criticism and linguistic stylistics, there is a difference in their methods and, as a result, in their assessments. linguistic stylistics, on the other hand, begins and concludes its analysis and synthesis with the literary text itself, rigorously examining how a particular configuration of language has been used to realize a particular subject matter and quantifying all linguistic means (including imagery) that came together to achieve a particular aesthetic purpose; Literary criticism is not constrained by the subject of its analysis. It occasionally works on the text in its own analysis, but it occasionally wanders off and adds extra-linguistic, extra-textual material (such as from philosophy, psychology, social history, or other fields). to apply it to the work. As a result, linguistic stylistics provides an evaluation that is somewhat objective and is based on real-world criteria; Literary criticism typically produces work that is imaginative, speculative, subjective, and impressionistic. This is the primary distinction between linguistic stylistics and literary criticism, as Leech and Short (1981) more clearly demonstrate when they discuss "Style, Text, and Frequency." Stylish terms utilized in the conversation of style (urbane, terse, overflowing, colorful, clear, plain, energetic, and so on.) are not directly related to any textual linguistic features that can be seen, and one of stylistics' long-term goals must be to see how far such descriptions can be justified in terms of more linguistic descriptions. The more a pundit wishes to validate what he says regarding style, the more he should highlight the semantic proof of texts; Additionally, linguistic evidence must be presented numerically for reliability. In this way, quantitative stylistics from one perspective might give affirmation to the 'hunches' or experiences we have about style.
On the other hand, it may bring to light important aspects of style that would otherwise be obscured, providing additional insight; However, it only provides a limited objective measurement of style. Besides, the job of evaluation really relies on the fact that it is so important to make one's statement… instinct has a good spot both in phonetics and analysis.
LINGUISTIC LEVELS OF STYLISTIC ANALYSIS Numerous academics have presented a variety of perspectives regarding stylistic analysis levels. These levels, Davy and Crystal (1969); (1973) Turner; 1981, Leech and Short; alongside other recent academics like Alabi (2008); Wales (2011); According to Khan and Jabeen (2015), these tools are essential for analyzing written or spoken texts. However, the written forms are the focus of this study. As a result, stylistics analysis entails a variety of general characteristics of language, such as sentence patterns, structure and variety, paragraph structure, imagery, repetition, emphasis, and the arrangement of ideas and other devices that work together. According to Khan and Jabeen, the primary levels of stylistic analysis are lexical, syntactic or grammatical, phonological, semantic, context, and graphological. Below, you'll find in-depth explanations for each level. Lexis simply refers to words in language. It has to do with the whole words and expressions of a specific language. Ogunsiji and Farinde see this level as that of word decision. Our selection of words is anyway exceptional. This is due to the possibility that they are influenced by a variety of factors, including training, experience, and even genetics. The identification of a word's constituents or characteristics within a sentence is the first step in a lexical study of style. In an advertisement, it can be used to achieve stylistic effect. According to Khan and Jabeen, the lexical level of stylistics analysis is the study of how individual words and idioms tend to pattern stylistically on the meaning level in various linguistic contexts.
Levels of Syntax and Grammar This level of analysis includes both syntax and grammar. "The aim is to analyze the internal structure of sentences in a language and the way they function in sequences, clauses, phrases, words, nouns, verbs, etc.," according to Khan and Jabeen. need to be distinguished and examined to determine the foregrounding and derivation." According to Jolayemi, "syntax is the study of the pattern of arrangements of the way words combine to form phrases, clauses, and sentences." Here, the syntactic elements of various grammatical features will be investigated. nouns (as subjects, objects, appositives, tenses, and other syntactic functions); The role of adverbs as modifiers, determinants, and other types will be examined. According to Jolayemi, morphology is the study of word-formation, or the study of how free or bound morphemes (the smallest units of a word) form words. Different morphological processes exist. However, the transposition of words is the ultimate concept of morphology. The selected bank advertisements will be scrutinized for their stylistic and functional relevance in order to gather more specific evidence of the morphological level.
Level Graphological This level is regarded as the study of print language patterns. According to Khan and Jabeen, this is an analogous investigation into the formalized spelling rules and writing system of a language. Siphon noticed that graphology rises above orthography as it alludes to the entire composing framework. Along these lines, it is alluded to as a degree of etymological examination which centers around the format of texts, the size or state of words and whatever other component that is graphical or orthographical. The purpose of graphology in a text is to draw the reader in. By conveying the writer's exact thoughts, graphology leaves a lasting impression on the reader. Punctuation, such as the comma, full stop, colon, semicolon, and quotation marks, are examples of graphological devices. paragraphing, dividing, foregrounding of designs, etc. Style affects all of these devices.

Alabi provides a clear explanation of how punctuation marks are used. He points out that direct statements are separated by quotation marks; For a brief pause, commas are used to separate sentential elements; semicolons are also used; question marks are used to end a question for emphasis, and so on. The deliberate act of making a feature prominent or significant is known as foregrounding. It is used to immediately grab the audience's attention. As examples of foregrounding, Alabi used "lower case letters," bold print, capitalization, italics, and underlining. Proof of foregrounding and different occurrences of graphology recorded as a hard copy will be explored in resulting segments.

Phonological Level According to Khan and Jabeen, the study of a language's sound system is the focus of this level of stylistic analysis; the official pronunciation guidelines. This level focuses on how sound effects help texts take on stylistic significance. Phonological devices include, for instance: phonesthetic, assonance, consonance, and alliteration. This level as indicated by Alabi is the degree of endlessly sounds mix. Therefore, one must provide textual or linguistic evidence if they assert that certain sounds are alike or different. However, since language is not used in isolation, such a deliberate use of sounds will also have meaning. This level is the richest and most significant because language is mostly spoken Ogunsiji and Farinde.
Contextual Scale:
The pragmatic level of stylistic analysis is another name for the context level. This level considers setting to be the spine of importance. It deals with culture and includes social, age-group, racial, ideological, political, and religious contexts as well as social contexts. A word may have different meanings depending on the culture in which it is used. When analyzing a text at the level of context, contextual factors such as the reader's cultural background and the setting in which the text is read must be taken into consideration because stylistics also addresses the sociocultural context in which reading and writing take place.
Simply put, this level is concerned with the meaning of sentences and words. At the semantic level, words might be utilized to deliver denotative, obvious, collocative, full of feeling, topical, or expressive implications in light of the speaker's or alternately essayist's aim. We may be able to identify a text's author, genre, communicative purposes, context, and more with the assistance of a particular characteristic word use. "Stylistic meaning" is a term used to describe this level frequently.
The idea of graphology is that it is a level of analysis at the linguistic level that studies the graphic aspects of language. Simply put, graphology is the study of written language. The idea of graphology as an etymological degree of examination is especially unmistakable in stylistics and multimodality. It is just as new as stylistics. It was first brought into utilization in quite a while in the sixties by McIntosh in the year 1961. In his paper titled "Graphology and Meaning," McIntosh made the following assertion: According to McIntosh, cited in Eva, "I have used the word "graphology" in a sense that is intended to answer, in the realm of written language, to that of "phonology" in the realm of spoken language." To put it another way, phonology is to spoken language what graphology is to written language. In the 1960s, McIntosh's definition became popular and evolved to try to integrate more levels than the usual ones when analyzing written texts. Although this was not always the case, it was mostly developed in UK stylistics and generally applied to the description and study of poetry and literary texts.
In later years, Halliday, McIntosh, and Strevens extended the idea of graphology to include spellings, punctuations, capitalizations, italicizations, and a wide range of other language-related graphic resources. However, this move has spawned numerous other linguists, including Vachek, Sampson, Coulmas, Harris, and Eva, who have also investigated the concept of graphology with an emphasis on the characteristics of alphabets and their historical development. In recent years, scholars in the field of stylistics have primarily focused on the ways in which graphological deviation can influence an author's meaning and produce aesthetic effects. For instance, Van Peer views typographic foregrounding and its evolution as poetic devices, whereas Nanny views the iconic characteristics of verses in relation to their length. An attempt is currently being made to incorporate some graphological components into the study of communication modes in light of the recent significance of images and pictures in communication. In order to emphasize the semiotic potential of typeface, Van Leeuwen looked into how certain graphological elements like typography, print layout, and color can be used to create meaning.
One of the main concerns of this study is that, despite all of these studies, the literature in this area has yet to define or classify a standard parameter for graphological analysis. In addition to this setback, there is a general consensus that graphology is not interesting or relevant on its own, and a greater number of people still misunderstand the true meaning of the word (Eva, 2015). This section of the study provides an in-depth insight into the linguistic nature of the term graphology in light of the controversies that surround it. It also explains how the concept has evolved from being simply analogous to phonology to becoming a complete and independent principle with many different elements.
In contrast to other subfields of linguistics like syntax, phonetics, and morphology, graphology is a contentious idea whose meaning is frequently muddled. According to Eva (2015):2, two factors contribute to this confusion: the concept's non-linguistic meanings and the various interpretations the word has received from dictionaries, manuals, and other reference works in general. Since it clarifies its meaning and incorporates many other features beyond the letters of the alphabet, Wales has attempted a definition of graphology that appears to be the clearest and most comprehensive so far. Examples include: spacing and punctuation.