Books: Corpus Stylistics in Principles and Practice: Ho
Editor for this issue: Rebekah McClure
<rebekahlinguistlist.org>
Date: 14-Dec-2012 From: Ellena Moriarty <Ellena.moriartybloomsbury.com> Subject: Corpus Stylistics in Principles and Practice: Ho E-mail this message to a friend
Title: Corpus Stylistics in Principles and Practice Subtitle: A Stylistic Exploration of John Fowles’ The Magus Series Title: Advances in Stylistics
In this book, Yufang Ho compares the text style difference between the two versions of John Fowles' The Magus, exemplifying the methodological principles and analytic practices of the corpus stylistic approach.The Magus was first published in 1966 and was revised and republished by Fowles in 1977. Fowles' own comment on the second edition was that it was ' rather more than a stylistic revision.' The book explores how the revised version is linguistically different from the original, especially in terms of point of view (re) representation. The corpus stylistic approach adopted combines qualitative and quantitative comparison to confirm the overall text style difference. The analysis demonstrates that computer assisted methods can identify significant linguistic features which literary critics have not noticed and provide a more detailed descriptive basis for literary interpretation of (either edition) of the novel. This analysis of The Magus serves as a case study and exemplar of how corpus techniques may be used generally in the study of linguistics.
‘This fascinating and well-researched corpus-based account of the relationship between the two editions of The Magus by John Fowles demonstrates the usefulness of corpus approaches to Stylistics, especially when insightfully combined with careful qualitative analysis. A "must read" for the serious stylistician.' - Mick Short, Professor of English Language and Literature, Lancaster University, UK
Linguistic Field(s): Ling & Literature Stylistics Text/Corpus Linguistics
About LINGUIST
|
Contact Us
While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed
on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.
linguistlist.org>
E-mail this message to a friend
