LINGUISTIC STYLISTICS

By

1Adepoju, Babatunji Hezekiah

Department of English, Faculty of Arts, University of Lagos,

Akoka, Yaba, Lagos.

adepojutunji2050@gmail.com

08034238100; 08082222060

1. Introduction

Every normal human being has the ability and capability to make use of language. Language is an

essential characteristic of human being and it plays crucial roles in human life. Through language,

individuals within a linguistic community are able to lubricate their relationships with others

within the society. By this, they interact and communicate with one another, to state their opinion,

convince others to accept such opinion; give and request information; express their feelings and

emotions, both positive and negative by expressing pleasure and displeasure alike, warn, give

instructions or commands etc. In short and mostly by language, a person achieves a desired end.

In fact, in the words of Matheusius (1982 translated), a language style is a method of goal-oriented

choice and arrangement of language means which is applied in the making of the text. The final

product is thus reflected as the principle of organizing language units, which out of parts and

details, shapes a unity compatible with the communicative intention of the author.

A stylistician, it is possible, may set out to examining a text from entirely an angle not quite

familiar to others owing to divergent views of different schools of thought, our focus in this chapter

is exclusively restricted, as much as we can, to linguistic stylistics. This opening, as it were, wish

to state that stylistics is viewed from two major perspectives – Linguistic and Literary stylistics.

This is to say, without prejudice to other views on stylistics, that there are other scholarly

approaches. These include General Stylistics that is interested in the whole range of non-dialectal

varieties encountered within a language (Crystal, 2003); Applied linguistics studies contextually

distinctive varieties of language particularly with reference to the style of literary and non-literary

texts.

1 Adepoju, B.H. (2016). Linguistic Stylistics. In: Odebunmi, A.; Osisanwo, A.; Bodunde, H.; &

Ekpe, S. (eds.) Grammar, Applied Linguistics and Society – A Festschrift for Wale Osisanwo, Ile-

Ife: OAU Press pp. 61-80.

Charles Bally, a student of Ferdinand de Saussure and Leo Spitzer were concerned with the

personality of the writer i.e. the expression or revelation of the soul thereby revealing what they

termed Expressive stylistics (McArthur & McArthur, 1992). Computational Stylistics and

Stylometry are approaches in which attempts are made to decide the authorship of disputed texts

on the basis of some specific and key features in the writings of authors who may have been

responsible for them. This is possible owing to the availability of the computer. In ESL and EFL

classroom, Pedagogical stylistics is a tool for the analysis of a text.

Cognitive stylistics is particularly interesting in the way in which linguistic analysis is

systematically based on theories that relate linguistic choices to cognitive structures and processes.

There are many other subdisciplines of stylistics, such as interpretive stylistics, evaluative

stylistics, corpus stylistics, discourse stylistics and feminist stylistics. All in all, whichever we may

address among these various terminologies, stylistic rules simply refer to optional processes which

highlight an element in a sentence or text in focus.

2. Language and Linguistics

In the words of Widdowson (1996:15) language can be seen as distinctive because of its intricate

association with the human mind and with human society. It is, therefore, related to both cognition

and communication.

The whole essence of language use is to communicate while the essence of communication is to

make meaning. However, meaning is not something which is inherent in the words alone, nor is it

produced by the speaker alone, nor by the hearer alone. More than this, making meaning is a

dynamic process, involving the negotiation of meaning between the speaker and the hearer, the

context of utterance (physical, social and linguistic) and the meaning potential of an utterance.

Context is explained in this work. Apparently, the usage of language itself is influenced by

sociolinguistic factors such as gender, education, age, occupation, racial or ethnic, environment.

Holmes (2001:1) defines sociolinguistics as the relationship that exists between language and

society. It deals with the influence language has on members of a speech community as well as

how the society influences the language. Sociolinguistics is interested in explaining why we speak

differently in different social contexts and it is concerned with identifying the social function of

language and the way it is used to convey social meaning.

Language style or manner of delivery of a message has a potential for making communication

successful. If it is not, as a result of miscommunication, style may be a hindrance for successful

communication and interaction. Style is seen in relation to how a speaker or writer describes,

explains, asks, warns, admonishes, persuades/convinces, appeals, informs, requests, instructs,

narrates, discusses etc. through the means of language use since it is important to achieve

successful and fluent communication.

What we are saying here is that everybody uses a language in conducting the small civilities of

life, apart from those whose brief it is to use language professionally to score certain goals –

programme presenters on radio and television, lawyers, speech writers and advertisement

copywriters (Babajide 2000:1).

From the above, it can be deduced that language style is a way of speech and/or a kind of utterance

which is formed by means of conscious and intentional selection, systematic patterning and

implementation of linguistic and extra-linguistic means with respect to the topic. Language is

chosen to suit the subject matter, speaker and occasion (Missikova 2003:16). More importantly,

according to Brown (2000: 260), style is not a social or regional dialect. It is a variety of language

used for specific purpose. Style varies considerably within a single language user’s idiolect. When

discussing style writing on the style of a writer, it is rather odd to describe a work of art using

“unqualified and unsubstantiated impressionistic” terms such as simple, complex, beautiful

elegant. Rather, is it correct to adjudge a work as simple or difficult without subjecting such a work

to the rigors of analysis (Osoba, 2001). If a sufficient explanation of language is provided, then an

explanation of the concept of linguistics becomes important. Traditionally, linguistics is defined

as “the scientific study of language”. Technically, however, Daramola (2010) explains that

linguistics is the study of language in a very vigorous way such that explanations are universally

applicable or empirical because such explanations are only verifiable but also experimentally

controlled. What this presupposes is that language is not only meant to humanise the society but

also to provide the framework by which the society advances each day. The field of linguistics as

a whole is divided into several sub-fields according to the point of view that is adopted or the

special emphasis that is given to one set of phenomena or assumptions, rather than another.

Drawing distinction between general and descriptive linguistics, Lyons (2003: 34) explains that

“it corresponds to the distinction between studying language and describing particular languages”

Both general and descriptive linguistics depend explicitly or implicitly upon each other.

3. The Concept of Style

Style is a 14th century old French stile which itself is from the Latin stilus (stylus) meaning a stake,

pointed instrument for writing. Today, however, it is somehow difficult to define the term style. It

is because style is acquiring several interpretations (Mohammed, Hassan and Shamkhi, 2012).

Some of the labeling attached to style include “style as deviations”, “style is choice”, “style as

distinct personality” referring to particular persons and to periods as in Elizabethan or

Shakespearian style (Galperine 1977: 11). Nevertheless, style remains a questionable word. We

use the word so commonly in our everyday conversation and writing that it seems unproblematic

(Verdonk, 2002).

The concept of style has a wide currency as it is applied to diverse human endeavours. Relevant

to us in this work is the view that style is a situationally distinctive use of language (Crystal, 1987)

which can be seen as an agent which integrates all “style-making means” and acting as a unifying

principle of text construction that pervades all textual levels. This performs also aesthetic, semantic

and characterizing functions (Cermak, 2001)

Carter and Nashe (1990: 36) see style as deviation. In other words, style stands out because, in one

way or another, it stands out from a standard. The contexts of style may be linguistic or non-

linguistic. This simply presupposes that style may vary not only from situation to situation but

according to medium and degree of formality (usually called style-shifting)

According to Missikova (2003) – A Dictionary of Stylistics – the most common characteristics of

style include the following:

a. Style refers to the manner of expression in writing and speaking.

b. Style can be seen as variation in language use. This could be literary or non – literary. Here

we have language of politics, religion, advertising, newspaper report etc.

c. Style is seen as typical of register, genre or period.

d. Style is considered in terms of items (lexical) and their distribution and patterning in a text.

This could be on the axis of chain/combination or choice/ selection.

Style covers every sphere of life. Lucas (1955:9) echoed in Babajide (2000) defines style as the

effective use of language, especially in prose, whether to make statements or to rouse emotions.

Style involves first of all the power to put facts with clarity and brevity. Style means different

things to different people. Samuel Wesley explains that style was the dress of thought. While

Jonathan Swift was of the opinion that it was proper words in proper places. To W. B. Yeats, style

was high breeding in words and in arguments. Surprisingly, the word “style” which now covers

the world of fashion, designers, models, celebrities, art and painting, and particular ways in which

a person does a thing is from the 14th century old French “stile” and Latin “stilus” (Stylus) which

was a stake, pointed instrument for writing, way of speaking or writing. In any case, our concern

in this chapter is linguistics. Style here, then, is seen as the conscious or unconscious selection of

a set of linguistic features from all the possibilities in a language. Style is about choice from

available options. To have a style is a complement comparable to having a class and not to have a

style is an indication of bad, poor, crude, vulgar, sloppy and slovenly style. Commendation simply

shows good, rich, elegant, refined, careful, precise and appropriate style.

Crystal and Davy (1969, 2003) distinguished four commonly occurring senses of the term style.

1. Style refers to some or all of the language habits of one person. It refers to a selection of

language habits, the occasional linguistic idiosyncrasies that characterise an individual’s

uniqueness.

2. Style refers to some or all of the language habits shared by a group of people at one time,

or over a period of time – old, middle, modern English.

3. Style, evaluatively, refers to the effectiveness of a mode of expression. It is saying the right

thing in the most effective way. This we have earlier explained as good or bad style.

4. Style is widely used to refer to literary language adjudging a work of art as either good or

bad which is partly evaluative and partly descriptive.

However, in this chapter we are exclusively restricted to linguistic stylistics as opposed to

literary stylistics.

Style, in a nutshell, is a variety of language that describes the way individuals speak or

write not expressly according to their original and social dialects but exclusively according to the

context. Consequently, style is seen as the distinctive manner in which people express themselves

in particular situation. It plays an important role in conveying a message to influence the meaning

specific of certain situation.

Style, thus, is any particular and somewhat distinctive way of using language (Trask 1997:210). It

is a system of interrelated language means which serves a definite aim in communication

(Galperine, 1977:33) since any use of language is an act of communication. Style is seen, according

to Vachek (1974:114), as individual unifying character found to be present in any work resulting

from intentional activity. We could go on discussing style as the width of the definition delimits

the area of operation of stylistics justifying its raison d’etre in relation to other competing

approaches such as Text Linguistics, Discourse Analysis and Pragmatics (Daramola: 2010).

However, in a narrower sense, style can be seen as conscious or unconscious selection from

existing optional language features obligatory structures of language.

This presupposes that style should be concerned with the evaluation and description of the use of

language in any given context in terms of its appropriateness and effectiveness towards realisation

of the functional purpose of communication (Babajide 2000: 123). In the words of De Vito (1967),

Style is the selection and arrangement of linguistic features which are open to choice. We may say

therefore that a careful choice of linguistic items which eventually will promote effective

communication is the focus of style.

Crystal and Davy (1969:9) are of the opinion that style may refer to some or all of the language

habits of a person. Thus, it refers to the occasional linguistic idiosyncrasies which characterize an

individual’s uniqueness. It refers to those features in a person’s expression which are particularly

unusual or original. By extension, according Crystal and Davy (10), style may refer to some or all

of the language habits that are shared by a group of people at one time, or over a period of time.

Linguistically, style will be any bit of speech or writing that we can single out from a general flow

of language.

It is a device from linguistic possibilities. It is a particular choice of

language made by a speaker or writer and a way of expressing and

interpreting the world (Leech et al. 1982:158)

Fowler (1966:1) explains that style is a property of all texts, not just literary and it may be said to

reside in the manipulation of variables in the structure of variables in the structure of a language,

or in the selection of optional or latent features. However, Fowler prefers register – a

sociolinguistic term which he defines as a distinctive use of language to fulfill a particular

communicative function in a particular kind of situation (1996:191).

4. Stylistics

Stylistics was modelled on the German terms stilistisch, stilistik in 1860. However, it was in 1882

that the word Stylistics was first recorded in English (Damova, 2007). Really, Stylistics can be

traced back to aspects of Classic rhetoric in its concern with dispotio (arrangement), and elecutio

(style) and ethos and pathos (the audience’s perception of the moral character of the speaker, and

the audience’s emotions as aroused by the affective power of the speech, respectively, ‘the speaker’

function in literary contexts being performed by narrators and characters more than authors

directly). Pointedly, however, contemporary stylistics is a twentieth century concept which grew

in the second half of the twentieth century beginning in Anglo – American criticism traced back

to

a. Sebeok, Thomas A. (1960) Style in Language

b. Fowler, Roger (ed.) (1966) Essays on Style in Language

c. Leech, Geoffrey N. (1969) A linguistic Guide to English Poetry

d. Freeman, Donald C. (ed.) (1971) Linguistics and Literary Style

The predecessors of Stylistics are Rhetoric (ME), Dialogic (1601) and Poetic (1727)

An explication of the study of the discipline of Stylistics is shown below.

1 Stylistics

2 Linguistics Literary

3 Phonetics & phonology Morphology Syntax & Grammar

4 Sociolinguistics Psycholinguistics

5 Theories and Concepts of

Language

6 Applied Linguistics Discourse Analysis Structuralism etc.

1. The subject of Stylistics

2. Division into Linguistics and Literary

3. Levels of Linguistics and Literary description

4. Perspectives to the study of Stylistics beyond the levels of Literary and Linguistics

description as found in level 3

5. The theme and concepts for the explication of all kinds of meaning in Stylistics

6. Sister disciplines of Stylistics

Adapted from Daramola (2007)

Stylistics is generally regarded as the formal analysis of style and its variations in speech and

writing. Owing to the complex history and variety of investigated issues, it is difficult to state

precisely what stylistics is. However, in its simplest form, according to Babajide (2000:123),

stylistics is defined as the study of styles. Style has been discussed extensively in a separate section

in this chapter. Style, then, is crucial and central to the study of stylistics. It can be seen as a logical

extension of development within literary criticism early in the twentieth century deemed to focus

on studying texts rather than writers of texts. The field of stylistics, though a twentieth century

invention, has moved from its formalist beginnings to the contextualised, discourse based

approaches practised nowadays.

According to Crystal and Davy (1969: vi) Stylistics has been considered a development and

controversial field of study for several decades. It is a field of study which is not only highly

interdisciplinary but also considerably eclectic (Hoffmannová, 1997: 5), though relatively a new

concept. Stylistics often intersects with other areas of linguistics such as Historical Linguistics,

Dialectology, Sociolinguistics, Psycholinguistics and many others. This, perhaps, is one reason

why the discipline of Stylistic Analysis is so useful. It can be applied to a variety of subjects. All

of the field are different branches of language study and should be regarded as different tools from

the same set and not rivals (Enkvist, 1973: 19).

According to Crystal (2003:460), stylistics is a branch of linguistics which studies the features of

situationally distinctive uses of language. It tries to establish principles capable of accounting for

the particular choices made by individual and social groups in their use of language. Situationally

distinctive uses are varieties of language use. In such a language use, stylisticians try to establish

principles that are capable of accounting for the particular choices that are made by individual and

social groups in their use of language use (written or spoken). It is the study of systematic variation

in language use (referred to as style) characteristics of individual or groups (Crystal: 2003).

But basically, linguistic stylistics is interested in the examination of grammar, lexis, semantics, as

well as phonological properties and other discourse devices embedded in a text. The difference

between this stylistic approach and sociolinguistic analysis is that Sociolinguistics goes further to

consider variables such as age, gender, social class, educational status as responsible for the

choices that are made by individual.

Stylistics is the English equivalent of the German stylistik and French stylistique (a branch of

linguistics that studies style). In the 1960s, Stylistics became established in the UK and the US. It

has, variously, drawn on the models and terminologies of linguistics at large. Stylistics delved into

generative grammar with a focus on ‘deviant’ usage, and recently on Discourse Analysis and

Pragmatics (Arthur, 1992).

Crystal (1996, 2003) and many available literatures discuss Stylistics in relation to the concept of

style. Stylistics is the study of systematic variation in language use (style) characteristic of

individual or groups. Crystal asked how we may set about the task of isolating and identifying the

linguistic features that constitute a person’s style. Importantly, then, we may need to ask what style

is. We wish to reiterate that the style of a person is as unique as his fingerprints (Ullman, 1973).

What this presupposes is that the style of a person is the identity of a person, a feature by which a

person could be set apart from other persons. It is a general characteristic that is specific to this

person. However, we may need to point out that while the fingerprints do not change, the style of

a person may change owing to differences in purpose, audience, situation, subject matter etc. Style

is the man himself, Ullman explained. It is the physiognomy of the mind.

If stylistics is the study of styles, then style is both crucial and central to the study of stylistics

(Babajide 2000). For this reason, an explication of the concept is necessary. Generally, as we will

discover presently, style is as thorny, as diverse as stylistics itself is. This is as a result of divergent

views on these concepts.

From the foregoing, it will be deduced that stylistics is as difficult to define as style is, for it has

several definitions.

i. Stylistics is the science which explores how readers interact with the language of texts

in order to explain how we understand, and are affected by texts when we read them

(Khader)

ii. Stylistics is the description and analysis of the variability of linguistic forms in actual

language use (Mukherjee)

iii. Stylistics is traditionally regarded as a field of study where the methods of selecting

and implementing linguistic, extra-linguistic or artistic expressive means and devices

in the process of communication are studied (Missikova)

iv. Stylistics can be defined as the study of choice and the types of use of linguistic, extra-

linguistic and aesthetic means as well as particular techniques used in communication

(Mistrik)

v. Stylistics is a branch of linguistics which studies style in a scientific and systematic

way concerning the manners/linguistic features of different varieties of language at

different levels.

vi. Stylistics is a branch of linguistics which applies the theory and methodology of

modern linguistic to the study of style.

As we can see, the recurring concept in the study of stylistics is style. In all, stylistics is a distinctive

term that may be used to determine the connections between the form and effects within a

particular variety of language. It looks at what is ‘going on’ within the language especially in

relation to what the linguistic associations are that the style of language reveals.

As a conceptual discipline, stylistics attempts to establish the principles that are capable of

explaining particular choices that are made by the individuals and social groups in their use of

language. These choices could be broadly divided into two viz: one, choice is made in relation to

the company a word keeps. This is on the axis of chain, technically referred to as the syntagmatic

axis. Horizontally, it shows readers or listeners the function of a word in relation to another word

in the group. Primarily, this structure establishes the grammaticality of a sentence. This often takes

care of collocability of words especially as regarded tense, person, number, polarity etc.

Two, paradigmatic relation is a relation that holds between elements of the same category which

is elements that can be substituted for each other. Paradigmatic axis is the axis of selection i.e. axis

of choice at the level of substitution. It is in contrast with syntagmatic relation, which applies to

relations that hold between elements that are combined with each other. The opposition between

'paradigmatic' and 'syntagmatic' relations is an important classification of structuralist linguistics.

The term 'paradigmatic relation' was introduced by Louis Hjelmslev. Ferdinand de Saussure, who

established the divergence between the two types of relations in structuralist linguistics, used the

term associative relation for what Hjelmslev called 'paradigmatic relation'.

By and large, stylistics can be described as the study of style of language usage in different

contexts, either linguistics or situational. Stylistics is the modern version of rhetoric. Rhetoric

taught students how to structure an argument, how to make effective use of figures of speech and

generally how to structure and vary a speech or a piece of writing for the purpose of producing the

maximum impact on the listener or reader. More technically, stylistics is the study of the linguistic

features of a literary text and others in which we bring out the phonological, lexical and syntactic

features that directly affect the meaning of an utterance. Stylistics is considered a combined science

of linguistics and literature, due to the fact that stylisticians always work on texts. Linguists are

labeled stylisticians when approaching texts with textual method of analysis.

Stylistics examines oral and written texts that enable us to determine crucial characteristic

linguistic properties, structures and patterns that influence perception of the texts. It is concerned

with the examination of grammar, lexis, semantics, as well as phonological properties and

discursive devices.

Stylistic analysis in linguistics refers to the identification of patterns of usage in speech and writing.

It is an attempt at examining the principles that are capable of explaining the particular choices

that are made by individual and social groups in their use of language. Stylistics depends upon the

tools provided by the theoretical linguistics to study in details the features of a passage such as

instruction, information and persuasion (Zulfiqar, ND). Others are command, direct address,

numbered points technical terms and diagram. Stylistic analysis is so useful that it can be applied

to a variety of subjects.

5. Stylistic Analysis

Stylistic analysis is interested in explicating how our understanding of a text is achieved. This is

done by examining in detail the linguistic organization of the text and how a reader may need to

interact with the linguistic organization to make sense of it. It is not interested in coming up with

new and starting interpretations of the texts it examines. It attempts to provide a commentary that

is objective and scientific, based on concrete quantifiable data – data which are applied in a

systematic way. Stylistic features, therefore, are basically features of language. So style is in one

sense synonymous with language.

Michael Halliday, as an example, used the term register to explain the relationships between

language and its context. Language needs a context for its existence but it is impossible to

understand the linguistic items without a context. Every utterance has its own referential context

and this stems from a particular situation in which the current attitude of the speaker to the reality

expressed, together with the attitude to the concrete or envisaged hearer (Matheusius 1982: 93

translated). Registers refer to varieties of language according to the use to which it is being put,

and the context in which it is uttered.

Register, to him, describes the choices made by the language user, choices which are dependent

on field, mode and tenor. The field of discourse refers to what the participants are actually engaged

in doing. It refers to the topic or subject matter of the discourse. The mode is the medium of

discourse. It identifies the text as spoken or written. The tenor simply refers to the style of

discourse. It categorises a text as formal or informal. The degree of formality, according to Joos

(2002), ranges from frozen, formal, consultative, casual to intimate. This analysis is situated within

context – situation, culture, linguistic.

To Halliday, each text that is scrutinized by stylistics can be viewed from different angles. Thus

fulfilling at least a few functions. Texts, therefore, are said to have interpersonal function,

ideational function and textual function. Here, interpersonal function establishes and maintains

social relations. It is all about the relationship that the text is establishing with its recipients. As an

example, the use of either personal or impersonal pronouns is analyzed. Not only this, speech acts

together with the tone and mode of the text are analyzed.

When we describe the ideational function of a text, we look for the expression of content or the

speaker’s experience of the real world not leaving out the inner world of his own consciousness.

Linguistics is concerned with the means of representing the reality by the text, the way the

interlocutors are represented together with the arrangement of information in clauses and

sentences.

Textual function provides links between language and the features of the situation in which it is

used. It is the references of sentences forwards and backwards (anaphoric and cataphoric). Such

makes the text cohesive and coherent.

Cohesion refers to the ties or links that exists within and across sentences or utterances that make

up a stretch of discourse or text (Osisanwo, 2003). Cohesion is realized by cohesive features which

are linguistic items. Cohesion addresses itself to the question of how sentences are tied up together

to form a united text. Coherence, according to Osisanwo, is a property of discourse or text which

refers to the logical ordering of elements within the sentence or across sentences. The explanation

of Osisanwo here places linguistic stylistics within the purview of Discourse Analysis and,

consequently, an interdisciplinary concept. The method of analysis can be seen as looking at the

text in great detail, observing what the parts are, and saying what function they perform in the

context of the passage.

The system of Transitivity is a tool through ideational function of language. It is interested in the

transmission of ideas. The focus of transitivity is that of representing processes or experience like

actions, events, process of consciousness and relations that cover all phenomena and anything that

can be expressed by a verb: event whether physical or not, state or relations (Cunana, 2011;

Halliday, 1986; 1976)

Transitivity as a tool for linguistic analysis specifies the different types of processes that are

recognized in the language and the structures by which they are expressed. Using transitivity, the

central participant roles are actor and goal, and the concern is on whether or not the process is

directed by the actor towards a goal. Here the structure can be grouped as agent + process + goal

configuration which represents the function of language expressing the language user’s experience

of the external world or his personal internal world. The participant could be major or minor.

The method of linguistic analysis is purely scientific. An application of speech acts theory in

stylistic analysis will be appropriate through felicity conditions while we can successfully apply

Grice’s cooperative principles; either discovering derived maxims or how the maxims are flouted

by characters, speakers, writers of a text. So, an application of linguistics to various texts (including

literary) and the style is understood within the area of study as the choice or selection of certain

linguistic forms or features over other possible ones.

In linguistic stylistic analysis, the investigation of spoken language usually starts at the

phonetic/phonological level. In written language, the graphetic / graphological devices are

analyzed. Further afield, our analysis comprises other levels such as the grammatical, lexical and

semantic structures. These, however, do not leave out a discourse – as – process view as a possible

angle from which style can be analyzed.

Stylistic analysis always requires an implicit or explicit comparison of linguistic features between

specific texts or between a collection of texts and a given norm. Automation refers to the common

use of linguistic devices which do not attract particular attention by the language decoder.

Automation correlates with the norm in language use. It conforms to those forms and structures

that competent language users expect to be used in a given context of situation. On the other hand

‘foregrounded’ linguistic devices are usually not expected to be used in a specific context. They

are considered conspicuous. They stand out to catch the attention of the language decoder.

Foregrounding is thus a deviation from the norm. Both automatised and foregrounded language

use depend on the communication situation at hand. ‘Booting’, for example is automatised in

computer booting but foreground in; ‘He is booting’ – referring to a student who is slow to respond

to a teacher’s question. Some other related computer language are seen in log out, delete, inbox

etc. Simply put, what is regarded as everyday language in a context may become foregrounded in

certain communication situations. What we need to know is that stylistics is a distinctive term that

may be used to determine the connections between the form and effects within a particular variety

of language. It is important to note that methodology for linguistic stylistics analysis is quite

essential. Analysts have the responsibility to say what they are doing and how they are doing it.

This will enable the analysis to be transparent to others. Besides, this enables readers to retrieve

how analysts have reached their interpretive decisions.

A full stylistic analysis, according to Malmkjær (1991) would describe a text at all the traditional

levels of linguistic description. These are sound, form, structure and meaning. An exception is that

it does not typically work at patterns created by long stretches of text. Such is considered in

Discourse Analysis, Conversational Analysis, and Text Linguistics.

What we do in stylistic analysis is that we focus on the items and structures which we isolate for

examination. These items are then described using terminology and descriptive frameworks which

we draw from particular school of descriptive linguistics available to us, stylisticians. This, of

course, will be the most useful for our purpose. The overall purpose, here, vary according to the

linguistic affiliations of whoever is analysing.

The question we may wish to ask therefore is why a language user has decided to deviate from the

norm thereby foregrounding aspects of the text. It is a question on why an author has decided to

express himself in that particular way. Some of the directions to which an author may veer include,

among others, (a) grammatical deviation which includes all cases of ungrammaticality. These

include incomplete sentences, unusual arrangement of words, and unconventional use of

punctuation marks (b) lexical deviation: it involves the manipulation of language at the level of

words. Lexical deviation is the application of such rules in unconventional ways such as forming

new words from existing root that it may not ordinarily combine with. (c) phonological deviation:

this is related to sounds of language and it involves unconventional pronunciation of words. These

are seen as deviant spellings in written texts. (d) semantic deviation: semantics is the study of

meaning of words and other linguistic units. The transmission of meaning by using unconventional

combinations of words is semantic deviation.

Stylistic analysis can be used as supporting evidence in law court’s being an aid to deciding

authorship of unascribed manuscripts (Malmkjær, 439). Pedagogically, people who need to learn

to write or speak in a particular style will benefit from becoming conscious of which linguistic

devices realise the style in question, thus, the relevance of stylistics to teaching and learning

situation. Here, references are made to texts that have features of a specific style, structures and

conventions.

6. Linguistic versus Literary Stylistics

Linguistic stylistics is different from literary stylistics in that the former abstracts and describes

the elements of language that are used to convey a certain subject matter. On the contrary, literary

stylistics dwells heavily on external correlates such as history, philosophy, source of inspiration,

etc. to explain a text, with occasional leap into the elements of grammar used.

Linguistic stylistics and literary stylistics have different emphases and different methods of

operation. Linguistic stylistics pursuits a scientific analysis, working with tools such as

grammatical, syntactic and phonological components of the language. Literary stylistics on its own

operates on values and aesthetics. It is not our focus in this work to explain the amount of war of

words that have resulted in perceived encroachment of the application of linguistic standards to

literary works. The fact of the matter is that exclusive linguistic stylistics or exclusive literary

stylistics that was advocated by Bateson (literary) and Wimsalt and Beawdshey (linguistic) would

be going to the extreme. Fowler is of the opinion that each needs the support of the other in the

common goal of the explication of literary works.

This is perhaps the area of convergence. Isidore (2010) explains that both linguistic stylistics and

literary criticism are concerned with the quest for matters and manner in a literary work of art (30).

Stylistics is interested in the message of the work, and how effectively it is delivered. Both

approaches (linguistic and literary) vigorously analyse and synthesise a work of art with a common

aim of presenting both the merits and the demerits of the work. In so doing, the work is elucidated.

This is not to say, however, that there lies a difference in their mode of operation. Linguistic

stylistics begins and concludes its analysis and synthesis from the literary text itself. An

examination is made of how a special configuration of language has been utilised in the realisation

of a particular subject matter, quantifying all the linguistic means that coalesced to achieve a

special aesthetic purpose. This is not done in literary stylistics. Rather, it intermittently works on

the text while occasionally wanders off and brings in extra-linguistic, extra-textual material to bear

on the work. Isidore and Edward Stankiewics are agreed that a literary scholar who takes advantage

of the linguistic techniques and methodology preferred by linguistic stylistics will certainly make

better explication of the work.

7. The Focus of Linguistic Stylistics

Linguistic stylistics is a term coined in 1968 by Donald Freeman, apparently to put an end to the

verbal feud between literary critics and linguists (Freeman 1990: 120). The modern stylistics can

be seen as a development from Richard Bradford and Graham Hough who were stylistic scholars.

They have linked the 20th century stylistics with the art of rhetoric as obtained in ancient Greece.

The Greeks recognised the informative, cohesive and persuasive qualities of a good speech in

public speaking. Elecutio was technically one of the five divisions of rhetoric and it was under this

that the figures of speech were studied. The modern stylistics can then be seen as a development

from this branch of rhetoric. The interest lies in the relations between form and content,

concentrating on the characteristic features of expression.

The concept of linguistic stylistics has to do with a stylistic study that relies heavily on the

“scientific rules of language in its analysis. The rules embrace the lexical grammatical, figures of

speech, context and cohesion categories. Any use of language in a literary work operates within

the confines of the “scientific rules” of the language.

Stylistics as a sub-discipline (of linguistics) grew up in the second half of the twentieth century.

Its beginnings in Anglo-American criticism is usually traced back to the works of Roger Fowler

(1966) Essay on style in language, Donald C. Freeman (1971) Linguistics and Literary style;

Geoffrey N. Leech (1960) A Linguistic Guide to English Poetry and Thomas A. Sebeok (1960)

Style in language.

The aim of stylistics, according to Crystal (2003) is to analyse language habits so as to identify

from an array of linguistic features common to English, those features that are restricted to certain

kinds of social context. Not only that, stylistics also aims at explaining why such features have

been used. The features are classified based on their function in social context.

It is in the opinion of Crystal and Davy that

The stylistician, ideally, knows three things which linguistically untrained

people do not; he is aware of the kind of structure language has, and thus

the kind of feature which might be expected to be of stylistic significance;

he is aware of the kind of social variation which linguistic features tend to

be identified with; and he has a technique of putting these features down on

the paper in a systematic way in order to display their internal patterning

to maximal effect.

The works of Crystal and Davy are expounded by Isidore pointing out the methodology of

describing the linguistic features of a text. Linguistic student’s attention is equally drawn to the

practical analysis of the language of conversion, unscripted commentary, religion, newspaper

reporting and legal documents.

In the words of Isidore as pointed out earlier,

Linguistic stylistics is concerned with the quest for matter and manner in a

work of art. It concerns itself with a scientific study applying linguistic

techniques to a work of art with the aim of presenting the merits and

demerits. It rigorously analyses and synthesises the work, examining how a

special configuration of language has been used in the realisation of a

particular subject matter, quantifying all the linguistic means that

coalesced to achieve a special aesthetic purpose.

Enkvist describes linguistics as a branch of learning that builds models of texts and languages on

the basis of theories of language. Linguistic stylistics consequently tries to set up inventories and

descriptions of stylistic stimuli with the aid of linguistic concepts. Missikova explains that linguists

should be interested in all kinds of linguistic variation and that style is only one of the many types.

A student of linguistic stylistics may be interested in the classification of linguistic variation

according to their correlation towards context, situation and others. Missikova (2003: 23) classifies

types of linguistic variation as follows:

1. Style – (i) correlates with context and situation (ii) an individual variation within each

register

2. Temporal – correlates with a given period

3. Regional – geographical areas

4. Social dialect – (i) social class of language users (ii) sociolect

5. Idiolect – indicating the language of an individual

6. Register – (i) context of situation (ii) different subtypes of language that people use in

different social roles – lawyer’s, teacher’s, doctor’s, pastor’s etc

Linguistic stylisticians object to literary critics who do not analyse the language of texts very much

but, rather, pay very close attention to the language of the texts when they read them and then

describe how they understood them and were affected by them. Such an approach is regarded as

‘claim and quote’ strategy which is regarded as an intuition. However, intuition is not enough

despite the fact that we ought to analyse a text in detail and take careful account of what we know

about how people read when arguing for particular views of texts.

Further moving away from literary stylistics, I. A. Richard, of the Russian Formalism, rejected

undue concentration in the authors and supported an approach which favoured the analysis of the

language of text in relation to psychological effects of the linguistic structure. Russian Formalists

and Prague structuralist began a very influential aspect of textual study in stylistics. This is the

foregrounding theory (see relevant portion on this in this chapter). Prague structuralists are very

interested in the linguistic structure of texts and how they affect readers.

Of much relevance to us in this chapter is linguistic stylistic analysis. Azuike (1992) has an

elaborate systematic guide on how style could show how different stylisticians devise their own

method of analysis. There would be many procedures of analysis. To start with, reading and

understanding aspects of the analysis will be related to how well the writer has been able to convey

his message.

Apart from grasping the message of the text and perhaps, giving the synopsis, the level of the

diction is necessary to analyse. The diction simply means the writer’s choice of words. The

effectiveness or otherwise of a message is largely affected by the level of diction selected by the

writer. It is possible that a writer operates on different levels of diction to suit different purposes

and different audiences. He may choose simple and concrete words and expressions. Some others

may decide to employ abstract, ornate and Latinate words and expressions that may challenge

many readers or audience. In any case, “the diction of a writer should reflect sufficient audience

sensitivity because the ultimate goal of a writer’s message is consumption by a target audience”

(Azuike 1992:121).

Considering the level of diction of work, an analyst also considers register, which has to do with

the appropriateness of the words and expressions chosen in relation to the topic of discussion. It is

through diction that a writer’s tone can be identified. According to Isidore, the phrasal and clausal

typology can be considered where it is seen that their occurrence is stylistically significant in the

presentation of the subject matter.

At the level of diction, still, quantitative analysis is of much importance to a stylistician. The three

types of vocabulary measures are vocabulary variability, the use of exceptional words and

keywords. Vocabulary variability relates to a particular author’s size of active vocabulary or his

ability or willingness not to repeat words but rather seek synonyms. It is a measure of non-

redundancy.

At the level of sentences, sentence types and combinatory patterns in the text are analysed. An

admixture of the various types of sentences is necessary for effective discourse. This is the level

of grammar. At the level of rhetorics, we consider sentence functions such as statement forms,

questions and so on. The punctuation patterns and their roles in the text could be considered. This

is so because punctuation often determines sentence types. There are others like parenthesis,

antithesis, parallelism, coordinating and subordinating devices.

Finally, an analysis of the paragraph is of great importance. Azuike suggests that

When we have examined these various elements of the text, it is important that

we make general statements on how they combine to give the text a unity.

Unity refers to how the various elements have been combined for the permutation of the subject

matter. He goes further to say that

The conclusion we can reach from this step by step analytical procedure may

be that the message has been effectively or ineffectively conveyed.

Azuike cautions that this conclusion may not always be a matter of success or failure as the writer

can achieve some measure of success in conveying his message even when there are obvious lapses

in his analysis. He recommends that the linguistic stylistcian can sign off at this point as he claims

that his analysis is objective and intertextual, that is based on the content of the text under analysis.

The concern of stylisticians is the analysis of the type of fluctuation or the reason for choosing a

given style as in any language a single thought that can be expressed in a number of ways

depending on connotation or desired result that the message is to produce. Consequently, stylistics

is interested in the examination of grammar, lexis, semantics as well as phonological properties

and discursive devices in a text as we have treated in this work.

More than this, stylistics examines oral and written texts so as to determine crucial characteristics

linguistic properties, structure and patterns that influence perception of a particular text. Following

upon this, it can be said that stylistics is related to discourse analysis and pragmatics. This, we

could say, enables linguists to study various kinds of texts, such as manuals, recipes, novels and

advertisement. In recent times, of course, films, news, reports, song lyrics and political speeches

are all within the purview of linguistic stylistics.

It is the focus of linguistic stylistics to provide, in pedagogic term, a systematic set of analytical

tools which are drawn from linguistics, which can foster insights in to the structuring texts in ways

that allow those insights to be open, evidenced and retrievable. Stylistics looks at what is going on

within the language and what the linguistic associations are that the language reveals.

Works have been done by Scholars to guide linguistic stylistics student on the procedure of

linguistic analysis of texts. Geoffrey Leech and Michael Short have provided a checklist arranged

in four categories – the lexical, grammatical, figures of speech, context and cohesion. In like

manners, Crystal and Davy have also outlined the methodology of describing the linguistic features

of a text.

Isidore explained Leech and Shorts Checklist in the following ways:

A. Lexical categories – (i) general (ii) nouns (iii) adjectives (iv) verbs

(v) adverbs

B. Grammatical categories – (i) sentence types (ii) sentence complexity (iii) clause types (iv)

clause structure (v) noun phrases (vi) verb phrases (vii) other phrase types (viii) word

classes (ix) general – noting any general types of grammatical construction used to special effect.

C. Figures of speech etc – (i) grammatical and lexical schemes (ii) phonological schemes (iii)

tropes

D. Context and Cohesion – consider ways in which one part of a text is linked to another (cohesion)

and whether the writer addresses the reader directly or through the words or thought of some other

character.

Halliday (1994:173) compares six processes according to the category of meaning. Transitivity

represents how the world is perceived in three dimensions. These are: the material world, the world

of consciousness and the world of relations. The material world designs the participants as actors

(initiator or doer) or goal (recipient or receiver). The world of consciousness is identified with

processes such as sensing, seeing, feeling, or thinking. It requires at least two participants-a senser

and a phenomenon. The relational processes deal with facts or things - attributive or identifying in

one way or another, the processes overlap thereby becoming cyclical rather than linear. The result

of material and relational overlap gives birth to existential process. The following verbs exemplify

this -sit, ensure, happen, exist, remain, arise, occur etc. The mental and relational overlap bears

verbal processes that require two participants - sayer and the verbiage (praise, insult, abuse,

slander, flatter etc)

Leech and Short (1981) provide a check list which enables stylistician to collect data on a fairly

systematic basis. A text, according to Mohammed et al (2012) using Leech and Short (1981), can

be placed under four general headings namely, lexical categories, grammatical categories, figures

of speech and cohesion and content. Analysis in this direction is possible as variations abroad in

different writers’ expressions (styles). Hence, the need for choice - a deliberate and an intentional

activity aimed at achieving a specific end.

In linguistic stylistics, we analyse sentence length and complexity. A sentence may be simple,

compound, complex or compound complex. Of course, too, sentence length can be determined as

a style by finding the median – an average from a number of sentences. In this type of analysis, as

embarked upon by Mohammed et al., an analyst could determine number of words, number of

sentences, average sentence length, most common sentence length, shortest sentence, longest

sentence.

Suffice to point out here that there is distinctive difference between stylistics and other linguistic

subjects. Consequently, stylistics does not study nor describe separate linguistic units like

phonemes, or words or clauses as such. Rather, it studies their stylistic function.

8. Various Authorial Approaches to Stylistics

1. Functionalist Stylistics – M. A. K. Halliday

2. Formalist Stylistics – Roman Jacobson

3. Affective Stylistics – Stanley E. Fish & Michael Toolan

4. Pedagogical Stylistics – H. G. Widwson

5. Pragmatic Stylistics – Mich Short, Mary Loise Pratt & Peter Verdonk

6. Feminist Stylistics – Deirdre Burton & Sara Mills

7. Cognitive Stylistics – Donald C. Freeman, Dan Sperber & Deirdre Burton

8. Critical Stylistics - Roger Fowler & David Birch

9. STYLISTICS: OTHER VIEWS

General Stylistics: General stylistics deals with the whole range of non-dialectal varieties that are

encountered within a language.

Applied Stylistics: Applied stylistics is used for the study of contextually distinctive varieties of

language especially with reference to the literary and non-literary texts

Cognitive Stylistics: Cognitive stylistics combines the kind of explicit, vigorous and detailed

linguistic analysis of literary texts that is typical of stylistics tradition with a systematic and

theoretically informed consideration of the cognitive structures and processes that underlie the

production and reception of language.

In cognitive stylistics linguistic analysis is systematically based on theories that relate linguistic

choices to cognitive structures and processes. It provides more systematic and explicit accounts

the relationship between texts on the one hand and interpretations on the other (Semino &

Culpeper, 2002).

Literary Stylistics: Literary stylistics deals with the variations that are characteristics of literature

as a gene and of the style of individual authors (Crystal 2003:460) Literary stylistics according to

Leech (1961:1) is simply the study of literary style, a study of the use of language in literature.

Expressive Stylistics: Expressive stylistics is much influenced by the works of Charles Bally and

Leo Spitzer. It was concerned with the expression or revelation of the ‘soul’ or personality of a

writer (McArthur & McArthur 1992:992). Nowadays, expressive stylistics is less orientated

towards writer or speaker but rather, towards text and reader. It reflects changes in literary criticism

with which it has long been associated.

Pedagogical Stylistics: This is a stylistic approach which supports the view that learners are

helped to develop foreign language competence better. Linguists whose views support pedagogy

are of the opinion that learners that are acquainted with stylistics are usually aware of certain

features of language that assist such learners implement the knowledge of the language at all levels

of linguistic analysis. These are phonological, grammatical, lexical and discursive – ellipsis,

repetition, anaphora.

Computational Stylistics: Computational stylistics (also referred to as statistical stylistics)

involves empirical verification of statement or judgment made in respect of a work of art (Osoba:

2001). It subjects texts to vigorous statistical analysis. It usually involves the collation and

counting of the number of simple, compound complex, active and passive sentences. It is this

statistical information that enables a stylistically information that enables a stylistician to establish

the stylistic characteristics of the text or the author.

Corpus Stylistics: Corpus linguistics makes use of computer-driven searches of the language that

has large multimillion word databases that help in identifying particular stylistic features, it allows

the power of computational analysis to identify significant linguistic patterns that would not be

possible for human beings to be identified by intuition. So, corpus linguistics focuses on what can

be identified computationally (Carter, 2012), it tends to be on lexical patterns, particularly patterns

which are frequently repeated. Corpus linguistics identifies words that habitually co-occur, with a

particular emphasis on the significance of collocation (Suiclair 2004: Carter 2012). Here studies

are focused on collocation, colligation, semantic preference and semantic prosody. Corpus

stylistics, essentially, is a quantitative procedure which involves an assessment of significance

drawn statistically from corpus-informed count. As we can see, the application of corpus stylistics

to texts involves qualitative decisions and interpretive acts that are made by the analyst in the light

of and of some degree in advance of the results from the assembled data bank (Carter, 2012).

Some others are: Phonostylistics , Interpretive Stylistics, Evaluative Stylistics

10. Conclusion

Linguistic stylistics is the description and analysis of the variability of linguistic forms in actual

language use. Style is choice; it is deviation of linguistic forms. It could be user-bound or situation-

bound.

Linguistic stylistics centres on what is there in the pages. The substance or message of a work is

conveyed by means of language. It is the concern of linguistic stylistics to delve into linguistics –

the scientific study of language – and abstract linguistics techniques appropriate for the description

and explication of the work. Stylistics is a book with blinkers. Readers who are active agents may

wish to point its numerous signposts in some other directions (Verdonk, 2002).

As knowledge keeps expanding and growing, linguistic stylistics is regarded as “very much a work

in progress” (Joybrato Mukherjee in Encyclopedia of Linguistics). The reason is that the object of

inquiry constantly grows, evolving new and specialized fields of discourse. Currently, research is

being focused on new areas of stylistics such as e-mails, facebooks, twitters, hangouts, vibers,

whatsap, and skype. As a result, theoretical developments will widen the scope of stylistics in these

areas.

References

Babajide O. A. (2000). Of Style and Stylistics in Babajide Adeyemi O. (ed.) Studies in English

Language. Ibadan, Enicrownfit Publishers

Brown K. (ed.) (2000). Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics (2nd ed.), Oxford: Elsevier.

Crystal, D. (1996). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language (2nd ed.) Cambridge, Cambridge

University Press.

Crystal, D. (2003). The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English Language (2nd ed.) Cambridge,

Cambridge University Press

Crystal, D. and Derek D. (1996). Investigating English Style, London, Longman Group Limited

Cunanan, B. T. (2011). Using Transitivity as a Framework in a Stylistic Analysis of Virginia

Woolf’s Old Mrs. Grey in Asian EFL Journal. Professional Teaching Articles, Philippines Vol. 54

August 2011 pp 69 – 79

Dámová, P. (2007) The Language of Law – A Stylistic Analysis with FOCUS ON Lexical

(Binomial) Expressions, Thesis Department of English Language and Literature, Masaryk

University, Brno

Daramola, A. (2010). Literary & or / and Linguistic Stylistics: Techniques and Discourse Analysis

in Makokha JKS, Remmy Barasa and Adeyemi Daramola (eds.) Tales, Tellers and Tale-Making-

Critical Studies and Tale-making-Critical Studies on Literary Stylisitics and Narrative Styles in

Contemporary African Literature. Germany, VDM Verlag Dr Miller GmBH & Co. KG.

De Vito, J.A. (1967), Style and Linguistics: an Attempt of Definition in Quarterly Journal of

Speech, 53

Enkvist, N. E. (1973). Linguistic Stylistics, The Hague, Mouton

Fowler, R. (1966, 1986). Linguistic Criticism, Oxford: OUP

Galperine,I. R. (1977) Stylistics, Moscow: Higher School Press

Halliday, M.A.K. (1985) An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnord

Halliday, M.A.K. (1994) An Introduction to Functional Grammar (2nd ed.) London: Edward

Arnord

Hoffmannova, J. (1997) Stylistika a … Trizonia

Holmes, J. (2001) An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Harlow, Pearson & Longman

Isidore C. N. (2010). A Linguistic Stylistic Analysis of Chuckwuemeka Ike’s Novels, An

Unpublished PhD Thesis, University of Jos

James, Leon (Leon A. Jakobovits) Rhetoric and Stylistics: Some Basic Issues in The Analysis of

Discourse

Joos, M. (1961, 2002) The Five Clocks: a linguistic excursion into the five styles of English usage.

New York: Harcourt, Brace & World

Leech, G.; Deucher M. and Hoogenraad R. (1982) English Grammar for Today, Macmillan

Leech G. & Mick H. S. (1981, 2007) A Linguistic Introduction to English Fictional Prose. London,

Longman

Lucas, F. L. (1955) Style, London: Cassell & Coy

Lyons, J. (ed.) (2003) New Horizons in Linguistics. Harmondsworth: Penguin

Malmkjær, K. (1991). Stylistics in The Linguistic Encyclopedia. London, Routledge

Mathesius, V. (1982) Rec a sloh in Mathesius, V.: Jazyk, kultura,slovesnost. Odeon

Mbatiah, N. (2012). Deviation as a Communicative Stretegy in Gamba la Nyoka in Swahili Forum

19 pp 117 – 126

McArthur, T. & McArthur, F. (1992) The Oxford Companion to the English Language. Oxford,

Oxford University Press.

Missikova, G. (2003) Linguistic Stylistics. Nitra, Univerita konstantina Filozofa Press

Missikova, G. (2007) Pragmatic Dimensions in Stylistic Analysis in Brno Studies in English Vol.

33 pp 91 – 100

Mohammed M. J.; Mohammed H. and Khalid S. (2012) Sentence Length and Complexity in

Hemingway’s Short Story: A Clean, Well-lighted Place: A Stylistic Study in Journal for Philosophy

& Linguistics and Social Sciences No 10 pp 41 57.

Osisanwo, W. (2003) Introduction to Discourse Analysis and Pragmatics, Lagos, Femolus-Fetop

Publishers

Osoba, G. A. (2001) Style and Stylistics: Definitions and Approaches in: Fakoya A. and Ogunpitan

S. (eds) The English Compendium, vol. 38 4 Lagos, Dept. of English, Lagos State University.

Rendsburg, G. A. (2009). Linguistic and Stylistic Notes to the Hazon Gabriel Inscription in Dead

Sea Discoveries Vol 16. Koninklijke Bril NV. Leiden pp 107 – 116

Semino, E. & J. Culpeper (2002) Forward to Cognitive Stylistics in Language and Cognition in

Text Analysis. London, John Benjamins

Sharndama, E. C. and I. Mohammed (2013). Stylistic Analysis of Selected Political Campaign

Posters and Slogans in Yola Metropolis of Adamawa State of Nigeria in Asian Journal of

Humanities and Social Sciences (AJHSS) Vol. 1 -

Thorne, J. P. (1970) Generative Grammar and Stylistic Analysis in: John Lyon New Horizons in

Linguistics. England, Penguin Books Ltd.

Ullman, Stephen 91973) Meaning and Style: Collected Papers. Oxford, Basil Blackwell.

Verdonk P. (2002) Stylistics in EA Journal Volume 21 No 2 Oxford, Oxford University Press

Widdowson,Henry G. (1975, 1996) Stylistics and the Teaching of Literature. Harlow: Longman

Zulfiqar, A. (ND) Stylistics and Discourse Analysis: A contribution in Analyzing Literature in

Academy of the Purjab in North America