What is Comparative Stylistics?

Answer 1

1. The objective of comparative stylistics

The objective of comparative stylistics is to study the stylistic characteristics of one

language in comparison with those of another one. This systematic study offers students a better and deeper knowledge of the features that distinguish one language

from another.

Examples:

- To become penniless /aflasa/

- The Arabs have pioneered in many branches of science /kâna lilc

arabi assabaqu fi:

Sattâ furuc

i al mac

rifati/

These are two cases of "transposition."

In the first example, the verb /aflasa/ is expressed by a phrase in English, while in

the second example the verb "to pioneer" is replaced with a noun /assabaqu/ in Arabic.

- He was blown away /dhahaba adrâja arriyâhi/

This is a case of "modulation," where each language describes the situation from

a different viewpoint. While English indicates the means (blown), Arabic does the

opposite: the result first /dhahaba/, then the means /adrâja arriyâhi/. Thus, we have a

"chassé-croisé":

Means: blown /adrâja arriyâhi/

Result: /dhahaba/ away

- Give a pint of your blood /tabarrac

biqali:lin min damika/

- Before you could say Jack Robinson /fi: tarfati c

ayn/

These are two cases of "equivalence" where two languages describe the same

situation by using quite different structural and stylistic means. In the first example,

the expression "to give a pint," "pint" being a unit of measure for liquids equal to

about half a liter, is rendered into Arabic by the equivalent /tabarrac

biqali:lin min/

which literally means "donate some of."

In the second example, the English idiom "before you could say Jack Robinson,"

which means "very quickly or suddenly," has an equivalent idiom in Arabic /Fi tarfati

c

ayn/ which means "in the twinkling of an eye."

2. The scope and limits of comparative stylistics

According to Vinay and Darbelnet (1977), the three above-mentioned cases - transposition, modulation and equivalence - in addition to four others, which are borrowing, tracing ("calque"), literal translation and adaptation, constitute the seven

techniques of translation. The authors of the book "Stylistique comparée du français

et de l'anglais" even consider comparative stylistics as a method of translation (notice

the expression, "méthode de traduction," they put under the title on the first page).

It is undeniable that comparative stylistics is beneficial to students, since it enables them to identify the characteristics which distinguish their mother language

from a foreign one, and hence to perceive the phenomena that endow each languagewith a peculiar genius. Yet, it is arguable that comparative stylistics can explain the

process of translation or set forth "laws valid to the two languages concerned" (Vinay

and Darbelnet 1977: 20).

Since the comparison of two languages requires primarily the performance of

translation, we can assert that comparative stylistics is subsequent to translation and

not prior to it. Therefore, the seven techniques are no more than means of comparison.

If we reconsider the example "he was blown away," it appears that, to translate it

into Arabic, one would immediately look for its functional equivalent rather than

think of the "technique" to be used, whether it is transposition, modulation or

equivalence… As a matter of fact, if the translator fails to find the appropriate

equivalent in Arabic, /dhahaba adrâja arriyâhi/, it will be useless to know that this

kind of transfer is called "modulation" from a comparative viewpoint. The same

thing applies, of course, to the other techniques offered by comparative stylistics.

Moreover, comparative stylistics usually suggests only one equivalent among

several possible equivalents of a lexical unit or expression. In the previous example,

we can say in Arabic: /dhahaba adrâja arriyâhi/ as well as /c

asafat bihi arriyâhu/ or

/huwa fi: mahabbi arri:hi/, all of which are expressions with the same meaning.

Finally, it appears that comparative stylistics, which is mainly interested in establishing correspondences and equivalences in two languages, does not go beyond the

limit of language as a whole to reach the mobility of speech and usage.

Hence, it can neither foretell the most appropriate equivalents for expressions in

context nor embrace all potential cases of translation within the ever-renewable act

of communication. The field of translation is indeed far from being limited or confined to linguistic facts, idiomatic expressions or correspondences that may constitute the subject of a comparative study