Ўзбекистон республикаси олий ва ўрта махсус таълим вазирлиги ўзбекистон давлат жаҳон тиллари университети инглиз тили стилистикаси кафедраси

Lekin baribir...

Lekin baribir,
Yuraging siqilib borib shahardan,
Sekin gapga solsang otang - dehqonni,
Qahhorni eslaydi yozuvchilardan,
Artistlardan esa Halimaxonni.

Muhammad Yusuf

МЕҲМОН

Куз. Одамлар пахта теряпти.

Ногоҳ хабар таркалди: диққат,

Марҳаматга меҳмон келяпти!..

Келди. Кўрдик. Ана салобат.

(Билишган-да, «диққат» деганлар).

Деҳкон юртга ёғилди шеър, байт —

Меҳмонимиз шоир эканлар.

Далаларни айландик бир кун,

Бир кун чикдик от миниб кирга.

Бизлар унинг кўнглин овладик,

У мавзулар қидирди шеърга.

Кетар чоғда аммо хафадек,

Мени имлаб бармоғи билан,

Шивирлади қулоққа секин:

Марҳаматда ҳайкал йўқ экан...
АЛДОВ

Дўстим мени алдади,

Дардим ичимда қолди.

Энди тинчим йўқолди —

Дўстим мени алдади.

Дардим ичимда қолди.

Тоғ йиқилди кўксимга.

Доғ йиғилди кўксимга,

Дўстим мени алдади.

Дўстим мени алдади.

Болаликдан у билан,

Бир дунё орзу билан

Ўсдим, мени алдади.

Энди тинчим йўқолди,

Ёруғ дунёни ҳувиллаб,

Ёнаверди гуриллаб,

Кўксим, мени алдади...

Онам тушунмас, дейди:

Қўзим, сенга кўз тегди.

Менинг эса бағримга

Ўқдек зил бир сўз тегди

Дўстим мени алдади!

***

Китобларки, бўйи бўйим билан тенг,

Муқовалар гулданми ё зардан денг.

Ўқилмасдан қақшаб ётган ҳар боблар,

Увол кетган қоғоз, увол ҳисоблар —

Лўттивозлар ёзган китоблар...

Бу харжларни кимнинг меҳнати қоплар?

Ҳаммамиз жим. Жим тортамиз азоблар.

Чунки авторларнинг бари арбоблар,

Лўттивозлар ёзган китоблар...

Ёшлар қайда дерсиз, олов-ўт ёшлар?

***

Дилда байрам, олдиндадир кунлар гавҳари,

Ўзбек юртда туғилажак бир сўз сарвари,

Тошкентдан то Лондонгача, Лондондан нари

Шу чоқдаги юрагимни тинглангиз, ҳой ҳу.

«Шу чокдаги юрагимни тинглангиз, ҳой ҳу...

Акс-садоси гумбурлайди гўё замбарак.

Сезгиларнинг бебозори менимча — туйгу,

Менга шодлик ва гулларнинг лаблари керак!»

MUHAMMAD YUSUF

Thus we have come to conclusion that that the stylistic function of syntactical stylistic device repetition, in our case, anadiplosis is the same with its equivalent’s in Modern English.


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 stylistics³⁷.

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 investigation. The inventory of special language media can be analyzed and their ontological features revealed if presented in a system in which the co-relation between the media becomes evident.

Within the language-as-a-system there establish themselves certain [definite types of relations between words, word-combinations, sentences I and also between larger spans of utterances. The branch of language science which studies the types of relations between the units enumerated is called syntax.

In the domain of syntax, as has been justly pointed out by L. A. Bulakhovsky, it is difficult to distinguish between what is purely grammatical, i. e. marked as corresponding to the established norms, and what is stylistic, i. e. showing some kind of vacillation of these norms. This is particularly evident when we begin to analyse larger-than-the-sentence units.

Generally speaking, the examination of syntax provides a deeper insight into the stylistic aspect of utterances.

The study of the sentence and its types and especially the study of the relations between different parts of the sentence has had a long his­tory. Rhetoric was mainly engaged in the observation of the juxtaposition of the members of the sentence and in finding ways and means of building larger and more elaborate spans of utterance, as, for example, the period or periodical sentence. Modern grammars have greatly extended the scope of structural analysis and have taken under observation the pecul­iarities of the relations between the members of the sentence, which somehow has overshadowed problems connected with structural and semantic patterns of larger syntactical units. It would not be an exaggera­tion to state that the study of units of speech larger than the sentence is still being neglected by many linguists. Some of them even consider such units to be extralinguistic, thus excluding them entirely from the domain of linguistics.

Stylistics takes as the object of its analysis the expressive means and stylistic devices of the language which are based on some significant struc­tural point in an utterance, whether it consists of one sentence or a string of sentences. In grammar certain types of utterances have already been patterned; thus, for example, we have all kinds of simple, compound or complex sentences, even a paragraph long, that may be regarded as neu­tral or non-stylistic patterns.

At the same time, the peculiarities of the structural design of utter­ances which bear some particular emotional colouring, that is, whichare stylistic and therefore non-neutral, may also be patterned and pre­sented as a special system.

Stylistic syntactical patterns may be viewed as variants of the general syntactical models of the language and are the more obvious and conspic­uous if presented not as isolated elements or accidental usages, but as groups easily observable and lending themselves to generalization.

It has already been pointed out that repetition is an expres­sive means of language used when the speaker is under the stress of strong emphasis as in the following "passage from Galsworthy:

"Stop!"—she cried, "Don't tell me! / don't want to hear, I don't want to hear what you've come for4/ don't want to hear."

The repetition of 'I don't want to hear', is not a stylistic device; it is a means by which the excited state of mind of the speaker is shown. This state of mind always manifests itself through intonation, which is suggested here by the words 'she cried'. In the written language, before direct speech is introduced one can always find words indicating the in­tonation, as sobbed, shrieked, passionately.

Like many stylistic devices, repetition is polyfunctional. The func­tions enumerated do not cover all its varieties. One of those already mentioned, the rhythmical function, must not be under-estimated when studying the effects produced by repetition. Most of the examples given above give rhythm to the utterance. In fact, any repetition enhances the rhythmical aspect of the utterance.

In poetry, literature and rhetoric, there are several kinds of repetition where words or certain phrases are repeated for a stronger emphasis by the author.

•