Some may say that the written word is solely influenced by the spoken; that one’s written thoughts are a direct result of something one has personally said, heard, or interpreted. Others will argue that a story told through continuous verbal translation can only lead to a less significant conclusion than that which was originally intended. Regardless, establishing a definition for the relationship between the custom of oral tradition and the short story as a literary genre proves to be a complex argument. Oral tradition is thought to have allowed the short story genre to emerge as a tool of knowledge – to create new ideas in a permanent text rather than preserving those of oral cultures. Debates and opinions aside, the real question lies not
Cowan Donovan Mrs. Poirier English 122 26 September 2014 “The large ant” and Formalism Formalism is a very harmonic style of literary criticism. To be a formalist is to believe that all parts to a story work together and follow a set line of criteria. Only what is on the page is taken into account. Although formalism is a well-known style, it is not appropriate for Howard Fast’s short story “The Large Ant”. Using Formalism to interpret cannot be effective because the readers need to understand the background information.
If you are hoping for the highest grades (B and above) you must make comparisons between the characters in the poems and Lady Macbeth. Intro All these texts contain examples of central characters whose minds are unbalanced. In Macbeth the longer nature of a play allows us to understand why Lady Macbeth mind becomes increasingly disturbed, but in the brief dramatic monologues of Browning we have no background to their disturbance. Another crucial difference between the Shakespeare and Browning texts is that we see the character of Lady Macbeth from the outside whereas the disturbed character is the narrator in all 3 Browning peoms, so we only get his/her perspective on events. The basic difference between a dramatic monologue and a play also means that different techniques are used to convey the disturbance.
Reasoning that amounts to nothing more than a "tortuous chain of hypothetical transmittals" is insufficient to infer access. . .
Indeed, in the critical reading of most dramatic literature, we face the added complication that though we can read a play as "literature," the play itself was conceived as a performance text. (1) Most of the studies on the language of Shakespeare's plays have been essentially textual ones, however, ones based not on the sound of the enacted spoken word, but rather on the contemplation of the printed word in the text. Yet drama, above all verse drama, is the spoken word, or, more accurately, heightened spoken language for acting. Madeleine Doran opens her book Shakespeare's Dramatic Language with the observation that "those of us who make our roomy home in Shakespeare never cease to wonder at his artistry" (3). A major part of this artistry, she asserts, is how each of the plays "has a distinctive quality, something peculiar to that play alone - a quality that is not altogether attributable to differences in plot, theme, character, and setting, but something that feels different, or that sounds different to our ears" (3).
If there is one word that can describe Raffel’s translation of Beowulf compared to Heaney’s, the word is simplified. Many literary techniques, including syntax, diction, and figurative language, are either absent or expedited in Raffel’s translation. Therefore, his version would be a much easier read for his audience in terms of understanding the plot and the language. The first difference seen once Heaney’s and Raffel’s translations are juxtaposed is the use of capital letters. Unlike Heaney’s translation, Raffel’s translation uses a capital letter at the beginning of every line.
Whereas in our love now, the language used is very colloquial and also quite formal. Although the poet writes about common sorts of things, the language is complex. The poet uses words like prevails. As in the last poem, an intellectual person would have no troubles understanding the language or the situation, a less vocally diverse person would perhaps struggle a little bit. The structures of the poems differ quite a lot.
Deep Semantics Of Imagery In The Color Purple Apart from its endless potential to engender thought which it shares with philosophy, literature is ‘a category of labour’ (Ricoeur, 1981: 136). It is a structured totality irreducible to the sentences that constitute it so that the first problem it presents as a work is that of understanding (Thompson 1984: 178). Reading a literary text is, therefore, quite different from reading other texts; here, the exercise involves a back and forth movement. The critic observes the clues offered by the text and the validity of his construction is through the logic of probability (Aristotle). In Ricoeur’s deep semantics, metaphor is indispensable for it opens a wide range of possible relations a word can enter into.
The essay contains irrelevant information, which makes the reader question what the main purpose of the paper is. The literary essay about a theme does not fulfill its purpose because it lacks significant analysis of the poem, or contains irrelevant information, or is mostly a summary of the poem. This essay is not a literary essay about a theme of a poem. It does not contain an analysis of the poem's theme, and it does not convey the writer's understanding of the
Having a flexible perspective on genre, interpreting emotional truth and reading for literary worth will challenge the obscurity that Fragments would otherwise fall into. The reader must challenge the concept of genre in order to protect Fragments from obscurity. The autobiographical genre of Fragments gives it a certain authority among similar fictional accounts. The author of The Wilkomirski Affair describes this authority as illumination (Maechler 281). When reading an autobiography, readers are drawn to sympathize with the character more so than in a book of pure fiction.