Literary Analysis: Objectivism, Language, and Poeticity
Perspectives on Literary Analysis
Objectivist vs. Anti-Objectivist Approaches
When analyzing art, two distinct attitudes emerge:
- Objectivist Attitudes: These posit that a specific, definable literary object exists within a text. Something inherent in the text makes it literary, an artistic specificity. This definition can also depend on societal context. Aesthetic meaning, from this viewpoint, is based on absolute values intrinsic to the literary text.
- Anti-Objectivist Attitudes: In contrast, these assert that there is no objective literary quality when defining literature. Neo-Pragmatism, for instance, suggests that aesthetic properties are based on social conventionalism.
For the purpose of this discussion, we will adopt an objectivist stance. Universals, such as imbuing significant meaning into a few words or using figures of speech, are examples. Certain aesthetic values belong to any literary text; there is an object that defines literature, representing its artistic specificity.
Defining Literary Language
The Quest for Literary Specificity
Language serves as a means of communication, encompassing various forms like music, signs, body language, pictures, painting, cinema, and literature. An anti-objectivist might argue that language is the most complex and sophisticated element of human communication.
Following Russian Formalism, the theory of literature aspires to become a science. Its primary task is to specify the unique qualities of literary language.
Defining the concept of literature presents many difficulties. Why do some sentences become literary while others remain as standard language? An objectivist would argue that there is an inherent quality that elevates certain language to art, such as subjectivity, figures of speech, or rhythmic value and measure.
Literary vs. Standard Language
- Standard Communicative Language: This is the language used for everyday communication, often referred to as the “zero degree.”
- Literary Language: This involves deviations from the “zero degree.” It is the same language but used with a different purpose and at a different level.
Key Distinctions in Language Use
Different transferences occur from standard to literary language:
- Formal Devices: These include figures of speech and other structured patterns. Anti-objectivists might argue that such patterns are also used in everyday language.
- Polysemy: Literary language allows for as many meanings as possible readings. Each person may derive a different meaning from literary language, unlike standard language. The literary message does not exhaust its meaning in a single interpretation; it is always expanding in different ways. An anti-objectivist would say meaning depends on the context/cotext, whereas an objectivist would say it depends on the language itself. Polysemy may also arise from the cotext and the context.
- Poetic Strain: From an objectivist point of view, the literary text possesses its own linguistic entity (tensión poética). Every verse transmits more information than the simple sequence of its words. Signifieds and signifiers often differ from those in everyday language.
Characteristics of Literary Language
Literary language is characterized by:
- A special form of knowledge.
- Its ability to create particular views of reality.
- Its reliance on special linguistic phenomena, such as connotation and ambiguity.
- Its conditioning of the linguistic operations of selection and combination that the author can perform.
Linguistics can help determine which texts are literary and which are not.
Understanding Literariness
Literariness: Mukarovsky’s Perspective
According to Mukarovsky, poeticity is the consequence of an aesthetic outcome. While literature depends on norms, merely following these norms does not guarantee the creation of a poetic text. Therefore, literariness is a conventional cultural option; by adhering to conventions, one can create a literary text.
However, poeticity itself depends on aesthetic value and is unpredictable. Copying other poets does not ensure good poeticity. Aesthetics are rooted in sentimental (evoking feeling) and imaginary (universal) reasons. It is also unpredictable because the complex textual whole of a literary work cannot be reduced to specific elements; it depends on the network or set of relationships established by different words and how they function together.
Artistic Specificity: Causes of Poeticity
The causes of poeticity can be observed at various linguistic levels:
- Phonetic-Phonological Level: Aesthetic emotions are provoked by rhythm, sounds, transrationality, and similar elements.
- Morphosyntactic Level: Poeticity is created by devices like hyperbaton or rhythmical syntax, which prioritize rhythm over logical structure.
- Lexical-Semantic Level: This level depends on the choice of lexicon, polysemy, and fictionality (especially if mythic or anthropological). Barredo states that every literary text is fictitious, but not every fictitious text is poetic. Fiction achieves poeticity when it creates mythic and anthropological themes, such as love or other universal aesthetic emotions.
Fictionality and Literariness
Standard communicative language, the “zero degree,” is neither literature nor fiction. However, every literary text is fictitious.
There is an implicit agreement between the sender (author) and the receiver (reader) when engaging with a fictitious text. This means that upon reading, the reader implicitly agrees with the author on certain terms: the reader accepts that not everything stated in the text is literally true.