Literature

Topical Words and Phrases (to be learnt):

study of literature or literary – литературоведение

criticism [7lwtcrcrw ¢ krwtwswzcm]

fiction [¢ fwk• cn] – беллетристика, художественная литература

science fiction – фантастика

publicism[¢ pÙ blwswzcm] – публицистика

prose [prouz] – проза

lyrics [¢ lwrwks] – лирика

epos [¢ ep]s] or epic literature – эпос, эпическая литература

humour [¢ hju: mc] – юмор

non-fiction [7n]n¢ fwk• cn] – документальная научная литература

pen-name – псевдоним

quotation [kwou¢ tew• cn] – цитата

poetry [¢ pouwtrw] – поэзия

satire [¢ sæ tawc] – сатира

bestseller [7best¢ selc] – бестселлер

author [¢ ]: › c], writer, poet, novelist, publicist, fantast, lyrist, satirist, humourist

genres [¢ ¥ a: trs] or [¢ ¥ a: trcs] of prose:

novel [¢ n]vcl] – роман

story – повесть

legend [¢ le®cnd] – легенда

tale [¢ tewl] – сказка

comedy [¢ k]mwdw] – комедия

tragedy [¢ træ ®wdw] – трагедия

proverb [¢ pr]vcb] or saying – пословица, поговорка

review [rw¢ vju: ] – рецензия

short story – рассказ

fable [fewbl] – басня

parable [¢ pæ rcbl] – притча

drama [¢ dra: mc] – драма

essay [¢ esew] – очерк

annotation [7æ nc¢ tew• cn] – аннотация

autobiography [7]: tcbaw¢ ]grcfw] – автобиография

genres of poetry:

poem [¢ pouwm] – поэма

rhyme [rawm] – стихотворение

epigram [¢ epwgræ m] – эпиграмма

blank verse [7blæ tk ¢ vf: s] – белый стих

elegy [¢ elw®w] – элегия

ballad [¢ bæ lcd] – баллада

ode [oud] – ода

fable [fewbl] – басня

means of artistic significance:

allegory [¢ æ lcgcrw], aphorism [¢ æ fcrwzcm], hyperbole [haw¢ pf: bclw], grotesque [grou¢ tesk], irony [¢ awrcnw], metaphor [¢ metcfc], simile [¢ swmwlw], epithet [¢ epw› ct].

literary terms we need to describe a book:

plot [pl]t] – завязка, фабула, сюжет

prologue [¢ proul]g] – пролог

epilogue [¢ epwl]g] – эпилог

dialogue [¢ dawcl]g] – диалог

character [¢ kæ rwktc] – описание, персонаж

portrait [¢ p]: trwt] – портрет

culmination [7kÙ lmw¢ new• cn]; – кульминация

climax [¢ klawmæ ks]

denouement [dew¢ nu: ma: t] – развязка

or outcome

exposition [7ekspc¢ zw• cn] – экспозиция

monologue [¢ m]ncl]g] – монолог

description [dws¢ krwp• cn] – описание

epigraph [¢ epwgra: f] – эпиграф

scenery [¢ swncrw] or view – пейзаж

Unit I

I. Match literary terms in the left-hand column with their definitions in the right-hand column.

Read and translate the Text.

Literature is what happens when human speech is used for something more than ordinary needs of daily living. In a strict sense, literature is something that has been recorded, or written down. And if we define “literature” as everything in print we shall be able to consider “planetary motion in the Middle Ages” or “witchcraft in Old and New England” as literature. Doubtless, nobody should be forbidden to enter any area he likes. But still it ceases to be literature. The identification of literature with any other field of science is a denial of the specific field and the specific method of literary study.

The term “literature” seems best if we limit it to the art of literature, that is, to imaginative literature. There are certain difficulties with so employing the term, but in English the possible alternatives, such as “fiction” or “poetry”, are either already pre-empted by narrow meanings or, like “imaginative literature” are clumsy and misleading. One of the objections to “literature” is its suggestion of limitation to written or printed literature; for, clearly, any coherent conception must include “oral literature”. In this respect, the Russian term “slovesnost” have the advantage over its English equivalent.

The simplest way of solving the question is by distinguishing the particular use made of language in literature. Language is the material of literature as stone or bronze is of sculpture, paints of pictures, or sounds of music. But one should realize that language is not mere inert matter like stone but is itself a creation of man and is thus charged with the cultural heritage of a linguistic group.

Literary language abounds in ambiguities; it is, like every other language full of homonyms, arbitrary or irrational categories such as grammatical gender; it is permeated with historical accidents, memories, and associations. In a word, it is highly “connotative”. Moreover, literary language is far from referential. It has its expressive side; it conveys the tone and attitude of the speaker or writer. And it does not merely state and express what it says; it also wants to influence the attitude of the reader, persuade him, and ultimately change him. The sign itself, the sound symbolism of the word, is stressed. All kinds of techniques have been invented to draw attention to it, such as metre, alliteration, and patterns of sound.

The sound pattern will be less important in a novel than in certain lyrical poems. The expressive element will be far less in an “objective novel”, which may disguise and almost conceal the attitude of the writer, than in a “personal” lyric. The pragmatic element, slight in “pure” poetry, may be large in a novel with a purpose. Literary language is deeply involved in the historical structure of the language; it stresses the awareness of the sign itself; it has its expressive and pragmatic side.

But the centre of literary art is obviously to be found in the traditional genres of the lyrics, the epic, the drama. In all of them, the reference is to a world of fiction, of imagination. The statements in a novel, in a poem or in a drama are not literary true, they are not logical propositions. There is a central and important difference between a statement even in a historical novel or a novel by Balzac which seems to convey “information” about actual happenings, and the same information appearing in a book of history or sociology. Even in the subjective lyric, the “I” of the poet is a fictional, dramatic “I”. A character in a novel differs from a historical figure or a figure in real life. He is made only of the sentences describing him or put into his mouth by the author. Time and space in a novel are not those of real life. Even an apparently most realistic novel is constructed according to certain artistic conventions. It is necessary to discern the extreme conventionality of even the most naturalistic drama not only in its assumption of a scientific frame but in the way time and space are handled, the way even the supposedly realistic dialogue is selected and conducted, and the way characters enter and leave the stage.

If we recognize “fictionality”, “invention” or “imagination” as the distinguishing trait of literature, we think thus of literature in terms of Homer, Dante, Shakespeare, Balzac, Keats rather than of Cicero or Montaigne. Though, there will be “boundary” cases, works like Plato’s “Republic” to which it would be difficult to deny passages of “invention” and “fictionality”, while they are at the same time primarily works of philosophy. This conception of literature is descriptive, not evaluative. Rhetoric, philosophy, political pamphleteering may pose problems of aesthetic analysis, of stylistics and composition, similar or identical to those presented by literature, but there the central quality of fictionality will be absent.

One common misunderstanding must be removed. “Imaginative” literature need not use images. Poetic language is permeated with imagery, beginning with the simplest figures and culminating in the all-inclusive mythological system of a Blake or Yeats. But imagery is not essential to fictional statement and hence to much literature. There are good completely imageless poems. Imagery, besides, should not be confused with actual, sensuous, visual image – making. Much great literature does not evoke sensuous images. In the depiction even of a fictional character the writer may not suggest visual images at all. It is not easy to visualize any of Dostoyevsky’s or Henry James’s characters, while we learn to know their states of mind, their motivations, evaluations, attitudes, and desires very completely. At the most, a writer suggests some schematized outline or one single physical trait – the frequent practice of Tolstoy or Thomas Mann.

All these distinctions between literature and non-literature show that a literary work of art is not a simple object but rather a highly complex organization of stratified character with multiple meanings and relationships.

III. Answer the questions.

1. What is considered to be literature in common sense of the word?

2. Is literature a kind of art? Why?

3. What terms could be used to define literature as art?

4. How does language function in literature?

5. How could you define literary language? What are its particular features?

6. What are the expressive elements of literary language of a novel and that of poetry?

7. Why are the traditional literary genres called the centre of literary art?

8. How does a character in a novel differ from a figure in real life?

9. How could we discern a scientific work from a work of literary art?

10. How can you prove that “imaginative” literature need not use images?

IV. Using given above key-questions refer the main points of the text.

V. Answer the following questions and get ready to debate on the subject “Literature ”. Summarize the discussion.

1. Is there any difference between knowledge about literature and knowledge of literature? How could you distinguish it?

2. Literary competence is complex to define. Is it anyhow connected with different levels of linguistic competence?

3. There needs to be a distinction made between studying literature and the use of literature as a resource. Studying literature for examinations and reading literature for responsive enjoyment normally involve different approaches and result in different outcomes. Do they?

4. Should reading literature be a source of pleasure and a stimulus to personal development?

5. Do literary texts directly reflect the experience of what happens in the world? If they don’t, should they? Would you say that most literary texts reflect the world we live in and our experience of it directly rather than indirectly?

6. Our reading of literary texts is enhanced and enriched if it can be related to our own experience of the world. How often does the literature read by the students do this?

7. Do you think it is still possible to enjoy reading a text (especially a novel or a short story) even if you think the author is distorting the real world?

8. The literary representation of experience is not a direct one; it is frequently indirect. Does this force the reader to make connections, to read between the lines, to seek for explanations and meanings?

9. Why might a work of literature become “inaccessible” if we did not activate our experience?

10. The authors state that “there are no rules to decide what can be accepted as literature and what cannot”. But what judgements or criteria are usually applied?

11. Can you suggest several reasons why “people who read books like to talk to others who have read the same books”? To what extent does it promote an interest in literature?

12. Do you agree that a literary text is inseparable from the culture of the country in which it has been written? Select a text which you consider to be relatively “culture free”.