Education of the republic of uzbekistan samarkand state institute

CHAPTER II LINGUISTIC STYLISTICS AND LITERARY STYLISTICS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY
2.1 The role of Linguistic and Literary stylistics
2.2 Comparison between two types of Linguistics
The two approaches have been distinguished by renowned stylistic practitioners. Here, we'll talk about three examples. Ngara, Carter and Simpson, Jeffries and McLntyre, and others
According to Jefferies and Mc Lntyre,
In this instance, literary stylistics is about using linguistic techniques to help interpret texts, whereas linguistic stylistics is about doing stylistic analysis to test or improve a linguistic model - in actuality, to add to semantic hypothesis.
According to Carter and Simpson. linguistic stylistics are:
the purest form of stylistics, in that practitioners strive to improve models for language analysis and thus contribute to the development of linguistic theory by studying style and language.
On the other hand, they describe literary stylistics by identifying its distinctive characteristic. They compose:
A distinctive element of work in scholarly stylistics is the arrangement of a reason for more full comprehension, appreciation and translation of avowedly scholarly and creator focused texts. The overall drive will be to draw variedly on phonetic bits of knowledge and to involve them in the help of what is for the most part professed to be more full understanding of language impacts than is conceivable without the advantage of semantics.
The following is
Ngara distinguishes between literary stylistician and stylistic critic approaches to style study. The artistic stylistician, he notices, 'applies the strategies for stylistics to the language of writing.' Notwithstanding, Ngara says, the expressive pundit 'has a more extensive space on the grounds that, as well as utilizing the insightful instruments of the etymologist and the stylistician, for example, sentence structure, lexis, phonology and prosody, he should likewise fret about the more extensive issues of deviation from the standard'.
The expressive pundit here is the etymological stylistics; In contrast, its domain is larger than the one expressed. It investigates different disciplines as prior.
Pitching the two together, the distinctions include:
• Phonetic methodology blossoms with etymological speculations and adds to the last option As a rule, the scholarly methodology utilizes stylistics as a hypothesis or potentially any useful hypothesis in its translation
• The evaluation of the text is the ultimate objective of the literary approach, whereas the linguistic approach investigates an instance of language use in order to contribute to a linguistic theory.
• While linguistic approaches thrive in interdisciplinarity and pay little or no attention to affecting the reader, literary approaches are typically author-based.
• The literary approach emphasizes content, whereas the linguistic approach emphasizes form.
The distinctions between literary and linguistic stylistics have been discussed in this paper, which employs empirical review as its method. In their analyses, the two primarily make use of linguistic theories and techniques. Objectivity is their primary objective. Their ultimate objective is the point of departure between the two. Still, the general goals of a linguist and a literary critic help to separate the two approaches. A linguist typically investigates a language usage for descriptive or prescriptive theorizations; while a scholarly pundit assesses a text. They bring these inflexible sensibilities into stylistics. It can in this manner be asserted that the artistic pundit has simply turned to stylistics for objectivity.