the monism—dualism argument in stylistics and translation

1、<p>　　The monism—dualism argument in stylistics and translation</p><p>　　Abstract. A core issue in stylistic research is the relationship between form （style） and content， which belongs to the scope of

2、philosophy and can be traced back to the period of ancient Greece and ancient Rome. In recent stylistic research， there are generally three arguments： monism， dualism and polyphyletism. Based on the monism-dualism argume

3、nt mainly， a possible consensus can be reached by interoperating the relationship of form and content into a dual connotation of content-form and thoug</p><p>　　Key words： stylistics； monism-dualism argument

4、； translation. </p><p>　　1 Introduction </p><p>　　There is a saying nowadays that the history of humane civilization is the intersected history of multilateral translations. As a certain way of

5、deconstruction， modern translation， especially the modern translators incline to reconstruct text against text， namely with the wine in others’ cups to water and fulfill oneself. In fact， stylistics is equally ambitious

6、as translation. Translation emphasizes on thoughts carried by words while stylistics emphasizes on words directly， and typical is the Sh</p><p>　　2 The Monism-Dualism Argument In Stylistics </p><p

7、>　　A core issue in stylistic research is the relationship between form （style） and content. Some addressed as monists hold that form and content cannot be divided； some prefer that though closely attached， form and co

8、ntent are still separable， who are named dualists. Besides there is the deconstructionists as the third party who， from the perspective of various functions of language， think that any simple remark can be deconstructed

9、into different meanings at the same time and hold the opinion of p</p><p>　　Of my view， form and content is certainly inseparable， once formed of the content， form accompanies with， what seems divisible is o

10、nly some superficial linguistic fragments， such as the simple remarks that can be repeated in daily life， or the mere comprehension and reproducing of some concepts. For example， the image of “l(fā)eaf” is not related too mu

11、ch to whether it is represented visually or vocally， while those delicate thinking and sincere articles radiated from “l(fā)eaf “ mean only one proper fo</p><p>　　Writing is to give ideas， whose form or style mu

12、st correspond with the intended thought and serve the thought， which Aristotle favors and further considers that form and content are inseparable. David Lodge also thinks literary works unexplainable，even impossible to t

13、ranslate. Of course， to many people， a consensus is hard to reach and all is in conflict. The contemporary Britain writer Arnold Bennett expressed in The literary interests： “Style can’t be divided from matter， when a wr

14、iter establi</p><p>　　“…when a writer establishes a thought， he forms it by a language”， the establishing of thought doesn’t absolutely depend on words， I think the “thought” here should refer to explicit an

15、d dominant thought， which means the thought has turned into content by linguistic embodiment， and thus “Style can’t be divided from matter”. Besides， since “thought expresses itself”， thought should be free， why again “t

16、hought exists itself only in language…”？ Must thought rely on language？ What is the relationshi</p><p>　　2.2 Thought And Language </p><p>　　As book transmits thought， language carries thought al

17、so. Lu xun’s literary career enabled “A drop of ink makes a million think”. So， perfect combination of thought and language， or otherwise perfect combination of content and form can produce incomparable spiritual power.

18、</p><p>　　Language can’t drift away from thought （or it will become meaningless codes）， but thought is not absolutely inseparable from language. To understand this point， we must bear in mind that thought an

19、d content are not equal though sometimes they overlap each other. Thought can be shown as content by the aid of language while content is not always qualified to become thought； thought can be recessive， but content is c

20、ertainly dominant， public and for everyone to know （except private diaries）. A phil</p><p>　　Very rarely does one find clear thoughts clothed in unclear language， more often does one find unclear thoughts ex

21、pressed clearly， and such a style or form is clearly unclear. Thus real thoughts should be the “recessive thoughts”， which mean the most original spark， the most precious mental earthquake and mean transcending experienc

22、e. So real thinkers perhaps are the thinkers with no words instead of those respectable philosophers or scholars， who belong to the second-rate. Simultaneously， thoug</p><p>　　As a result， thought is not nec

23、essarily in want of stylistics or languages as overdress， “dominant thought” is thought in clothes， which is wrapped and functionalized， while “recessive thought” is thought itself， independent and free enough to walk ev

24、erywhere without clothes. </p><p>　　3 About Language Itself </p><p>　　It is well known that stylistic analysis is about researching language and analyzing linguistic phenomena while translation

25、is for reproducing thoughts behind language， so language research is vital to both stylistics and translation. Meanwhile， human thoughts have always been elusive and subtle， but as a vital thought-carrying tool， language

26、 is inevitably slippery， uncertain and self-betraying， therefore， when language makes itself an authority， also a limit to itself. </p><p>　　Language’s function is to express， but compared with the profundit

27、y of thoughts， language is sometimes incompetent； also because of certain factors such as context， cultural background or instinctive elements， language is sometimes unnecessary， even in certain cultures， language is pur

28、posely resisted. For example， suggestiveness， instead of articulateness， is the ideal of all Chinese art， whether it be poetry， painting， or anything else， which is not without its philosophical background. In the </p

29、><p>　　4 The Monism-Dualism Argument In Stylistics </p><p>　　And Translation </p><p>　　Arguments of the relationship between form and content have long existed in academic field； in fa

30、ct， the two aspects supplement each other and whose respective research is only for deepening themselves individually. Now dualism seems prevail in the circle， even appears such an opinion that no acknowledgement of dual

31、ism means no necessity of stylistics and translation. Stylistics and translations are certainly necessary， but the dualism of form and content here is not necessarily irrefutable， jus</p><p>　　When thought i

32、s externalized as content， thought is translated （deconstructed）， in which the two sides do not equalize exactly but only approximate to each other， and the meant thought has been distorted， perfected or misrepresented，

33、which is due to the delicacy of thought as well as the limitation and the refinement of language. Because “recessive thought” is once embodied into “dominant thought”， the original meaning of the “recessive thought” woul

34、d be blocked， consumed or possibly improved…Fo</p><p>　　References </p><p>　　[1] Wang Zuoliang，Ding Wangdao，English Stylistics cited theory[M].Beijing： Foreign Language Teaching and Research Pre