Résumés
Abstract
The special literary patterns have already been studied under the general category of literary textual strategies where it has been argued how these textual strategies would set the special literary processes in motion in the cognitive system of the receiver leading to the formation of a special literary meaning, i.e. the literary effect (cf. Lotfipour-Saedi 1992a). The present paper will examine two types of literary textual strategies and the way they function in the activation of the special literary discourse process.
Keywords/Mots-clés:
- literary effect,
- literary strategies,
- expectancy violation,
- discoursal strategies,
- lexical locality
Résumé
Les patrons de la littérature spéciale ont déjà été étudiés dans la catégorie générale de stratégies littéraires textuelles où l’on a discuté de la façon dont ces stratégies créent dans le système cognitif du récepteur un processus de formation spéciale du sens littéraire, soit l’effet littéraire (cf. Lotfipour-Saedi 1992a). L’article examine deux types de stratégies de textes littéraires et la façon dont l’activation du procédé de ce type de discours s’effectue.
Parties annexes
References
- Bransford, J.D. (1979): Human Cognition, Learning. Understanding and Remembering, Wadsworth Publishing Company.
- Carrell, P.L. (1983): “Some issues in studying the role of schemata, or background knowledge in second language comprehension,” in Reading in a ForeignLanguage 1, p. 81-92.
- Goudarzi, Z. (2000): Lexical Choice in Poetic Discourse: Explorations in Literary Style, An unpublished M.A. dissertation, Department of English, University of Tabriz.
- Halliday, M.A.K. (1985): An Introduction to Functional Grammar, London, Edward Arnolds.
- Halliday, M.A.K. and R. Hasan (1976): Cohesion in English, London, Longmans.
- Hatim,B. and I. Mason (1997): The Translator as Communicator, London, Routledge.
- Hymes, D. (1972): “Toward ethnographies of communication: The analysis of Communicative events,” in Giglioli, P.P. (ed.) Language and Social Context Harmondsworth, Penguin, p. 21-44.
- Lotfipour-Saedi, K. (1992a): “Analysing literary discourse: implications for literary translation,” Meta 37-2, p. 389- 397.
- Lotfipour-Saedi, K. (1992 b): “Dimensions of variations in textual strategies and their cognitive effect,” Proceedings of the 15th International CongressOf Linguists (CIL), Laval University, Quebec, Canada.
- Lotfipour-Saedi, K. (1996): “Translation principles vs translator strategies,” Meta 41-3, p. 389-392.
- Schank, R. and R. Abelson (1977): Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding, Hillsdale, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- Shklovsky, J. (1965): in Lemon, L.T. and M. Reis (1965) Russian Formalist Criticism: Four Essays, Lincoln, Nebraska University Press.
- Swales, J. M. (1986): “A genre-based approach to language across the curriculum,” in L.Tickoo-Makham (ed.) Language Across the Curriculum, RELC, p. 10-22.
- Tadros, A.A. (1994): “Predictive categories in expository text,” in Coulthard, M. (ed.) Advances in Written Text Analysis, London, Routledge, p. 69-82.
10.7202/004015ar