Yakovets O.R. Vinnytsia Ukraine
FUNCTIONAL-TYPOLOGICAL LINGUISTICS OF TEXTS
Functional-typological linguistics of texts may bring the rest of philological disciplines whose
modeled object is text into line with a developing trans-disciplinary cognitive-communicative
paradigm. This new linguistic discipline transcends the traditional frameworks of text linguistics
that has generalized text categories irrespective of the evolution of text types and genres, of text
typology that is oriented mostly to non-fictional types of texts due to their clich?d and
transparent text structure, and of literary criticism that concentrates on literary genres, social
contexts, masculinity and feminism, postcolonial tropics, deconstructive interpretation, and
intertextuality.
First, as a branch of the science of texts, functional-typological linguistics concentrates on the
textual level that includes a separate text, a group of texts referring to the same genre, a writer’s
idiostyle, and a hyper-textual level represented by a collective idiostyle of the epoch within one
language and culture, as well as synchronous idiostyles belonging to diverse languages and
cultures. Second, this branch of linguistic text typology may become one of the broadest and
most comprehensive philological disciplines, especially in conjunction with typology of writers’
idiostyles and idiolects in the process of their evolution. Third, within the framework of
typological studies it logically leads to the highest level of analysis, literary discourse, as a space
of multiple language intersections in which text and language structures function.
Functional-typological linguistics of texts is built by accumulative knowledge of text structure
and modeling that helps understand how the human mind creates value of the epoch by means of
literary discourse. To my knowledge, no studies have examined functional-typological
fundamentals of transnational text modeling in synchronous idiostyles of writers such as, for
example, J. Joyce, M. Proust, T. Mann, and A. Bely. However, the problem is important because
it opens new perspectives for the study of literary discourse as integrated into the cognitive
development of humanity by specially organized language of fiction. Especially, such influences
tend to dramatically enhance during the periods of drastic changes and language experiments in
literary discourse that are found in above mentioned idiostyles of writers. From our viewpoint, in
the first third of the 20 th century the idiostyle of James Joyce became a core idiostyle of the
epoch whose text model transformed traditional narrative into epiphanic literary discourse that
can be traced beyond Anglophone collective idiostyle of his epoch.
Drawing on recent research into functional-typological research, as it is manifest in a broad
context of text-theoretical research, the scholars argue that literary discourse functions in
accordance with our thinking and acting “within a particular region of socio-communicative
space.” (Herman, 2001, np) Namely, texts may be unfolded as narrated actions or they become
the ones in which language is given a priority. It is interesting to note that the polysystem theory
considers hierarchical subcultures, competitive and shifting, to be influenced by forces outside
the literary system. This assumption favors other influences between cultures and languages than
intertextuality, For example, it is important that researchers should examine how Thomas Mann
is indebted to Joyce whose language innovative techniques might have been incorporated into
German literary discourse. Similarly, it is not enough to say that “To the Lighthouse” by Virginia
Woolf has allusions to Proust (Shaffer, 2006, p.195).
Apparently, these influences go beyond intertextual echoes; hence, the intersecting character of
synchronous literary discourse may be much deeper, at the cognitive level of text structures and
text interpretation. From this perspective, literary discourse in synchronous idiostyles of writers
cannot be analyzed in isolation: there must be the core idiostyle of writer that continuously
develops a linguistic-typological variant of literary discourse whose language means can be
found in other synchronous writers and due to this interaction this variant, together with other
variants, participates in creating the linguistic typology of texts in the concrete epoch. Similar
shifts that contribute to the development of world literary discourse of the epoch may be traced
in other languages and cultures due to direct borrowing of innovative techniques of text building
or via translation.
The first third of the 20 th century is known for a shift that creates space for active consciousness
of the author and the reader by language functioning. In the Anglophone collective idiostyle of
the epoch this model was created to its full in the idiostyle of James Joyce, so from Epiphanies to
“Finnegans Wake” homogenous epiphanic modeling can be traced in its evolution from making
innovative techniques typological due to their reiterative use for the purpose of introducing new
innovations that also tend to acquire the same typological status. These innovations become
integrated into other synchronous idiostyles . In support of G. Lernout, “in Joyce something
happens that is crucial to all of us.” (Lernout, 2002, p. 337) The collective idiostyle of the epoch
is divided into innovative idiostyles, with Joyce, E.M. Foster, D.H. Lawrence K. Mansfield, V.
Woolf, D. Richardson, G. Stein, S. Anderson , and W. Faulkner, among others, on the one hand,
and traditional idiostyles of J. Galsworthy. W.S. Maugham, A. Bennett, H.G. Wells, among
others, on the other hand (D’Arcy, 1999, np).
To sum up, functional-typological linguistics of texts has a great potential for interdisciplinary
research that studies the way human consciousness functions in language by creating
intercultural ways of literary communication in literary discourse.
References :
1. D’Arcy, C. Katherine Mansfield. Papers in Language and Literature, 35 (3), 1999, p. 244+,
from: http://www.questia.com
2. Herman, D. Sciences of the text. PMC , 11 (3), 2001, from: http://muse.jhu.edu
3. Lernout, G. Crises in Joyce Studies. Studies in the Novel , 34 (3), 2002, p. 337+, from:
http://www.questia.com
4. Shaffer, E. Introduction. Comparative Critical Studies, 3 (3), 2006, pp. 191-198.