A semantic analysis of dual voice in a literary style

Ștefan Oltean

doi:10.17684/i3a37en

Abstract

This article proposes an account of dual voice in free indirect discourse (FID), a point-of-view narrative style used mainly in literary narrative for the representation of verbal events, and of verbal or non-verbal mental events (see Oltean, 1993). First, it sums up in a nutshell the issue of what constitutes FID, without dealing in detail with what distinguishes it from “normal” indirect discourse and direct discourse (see, for this matter, Ehrlich, 1990; McHale, 1978; Oltean, 1993). Next, it addresses the issue of dual voice associated with this discourse mode, after which it gives an outline of the analytical framework. Finally, it provides a description for an FID sentence selected from English literary prose, with a view to furnishing evidence for its dual nature.

Highlights

Free indirect discourse (FID) is a discourse mode used especially in literary narrative for the representation of verbal events and of verbal or nonverbal mental events
FID and the referential question In Oltean (1993) we have shown that FID—as a discourse mode used especially in literary narrative for the representation of verbal events, and of verbal or non-verbal mental events—is about a discursive act in a world of fiction, or about an act of mentation belonging to the character’s spontaneous, non-reflective consciousness
Since the parenthetical predicate does not presuppose the truth of the complement clause in a world in which the sentence is produced but in a world in which what the character thinks is actualized, tomorrow is assigned a semantic value by the formula

Summary

Introduction

Free indirect discourse (FID) is a discourse mode used especially in literary narrative for the representation of verbal events and of verbal or nonverbal mental events. Banfield (1982) distinguishes, on the basis of the presence or absence of various syntactic and lexical features (e.g., expressive elements, such as exclamations, repetitions, questions, etc., personal pronouns, deictics, tense, particular lexical expressions), sentences of represented speech and thought, or FID (noncommunicative, expressive), from those of narration (noncommunicative, nonexpressive) and discourse (communicative, expressive), and labels the first two types “unspeakable sentences.”. Such sentences display a nonassertive structure since they do not quote or report the discourse (external or internal) of an original speaker and do not issue from any addresser They are not grounded on any intentional mental act of evaluation on the part of the character, which would require a first-person marking, but merely represent a state of mind (including its expressivity) or an intermediate level of consciousness, namely, spontaneous, non-reflective consciousness. They create the knowledge of an event (i.e., a character’s action or his/her inner state), but lack “semiotic motivation” (see Ron, 1981) since they have no marking for a (real or imaginary) transmitter

FID and the referential question

Conclusions