Kurdistan Regional Government Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research University of Sulaimani Faculty of Humanities School of Languages Department of English
A Semantic-Pragmatic Study of Rhetorical Questions in Selected English Metaphysical Poems A Thesis Submitted to the Council of the School of Languages, Faculty of Humanities, University of Sulaimani, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in English Language and Linguistics
By
Kazhal Mohammed Amin Saeed
Supervised by Asst. Prof. Dr. Ayad Hameed Mahmud
2015
1436 Hijri
2715 Kurdish
ُاليَعِلَمُونَِإنَّمَاَيتَذَكَّر َ ستَوِي اَّل ِذينَيَعِلَمُونَ وَاَّلذِيَن ِ قُلِ هَ ِلَي )3/93 (الزمرِأُولُوالِأَلِبَاب In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. "Are those who know equal to those who do not know? Only they will remember [who are] people of understanding." )The Holy Quran 39:9) Translated by Sahih International
i
Dedication
To My Parents; To My Spouse and My kids: Paiwand, Sangeen, and Soma; To My Sisters and Brothers;
With Love and Respect
Kazhal
iv
Acknowledgments All praise is due to Allah the most generous, and peace be upon all prophets. I express my thanks and respect to Kurdistan Regional Government, Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research, University of Sulaimani Presidency, School of Languages and the Department of English. My deepest gratitude and appreciation go to my supervisor Asst. Prof. Dr. Ayad Hameed Mahmood for his patience, encouragement, fruitful comments, and feedback during writing the present study. I shall always be indebted to him. I would like to extend my gratefulness to the dean of School of Basic Education Asst. Prof. Dr. Abbass Mustafa and the dean of School of Languages Dr. Kawan Othman for all their help and support. I would also like to express my thanks to the teachers of both English departments who provide me with necessary help in particular Dr. Azad Hassan, Head of English Department, School of Languages, and Asst. Lecturer Barham Abdul-Sattr, Head of English Department, School of Basic Education, University of Sulaimani for their continous help and cooperation while writing this piece of academic work. I also want to thank all teachers who taught me during the master courses: Asst. Prof. Dr. Abbass Mustafa, Prof. Dr. Basim Yahiah, Asst. Prof. Dr. Hoshang Farooq, Dr. Rauf Kareem, Dr. Salah Muhammad, Dr. Suhair Safwat, Dr. Safwat Hawar, and Dr. Zeki Hamawand. I appreciate all their effort. I would like to extend my gratefulness to Prof. Dr. Anis Behnam Naoum for all his effort and efficient guidance. I also would like to show my appreciation to Prof. Dr. Ismail Mohammad Karadaghy who provided me with valuable viewpoints and sources, and Asst. Prof Dr. Hamdi Hameed who advised me to choose metaphysical poetry as a genre and made some important sources available to me.
v
I also like to express my thanks to Dr. Harth, Dr.Galawezh Dr. Bakhtiar Sabir, Dr. Kanar, Dr. Bexal, Dr. Hiba, Dr. Karwan Omer, Dr. Sara, Dr. Shylan and Dr. Zanyar, Mr. Shamal Abu-Bakir, Mr. Zana Mahmud, Mr. Mariwan Naseradin, Mrs. Sima Majid, Mr.Hazhar and Yousif Muhammed for their cooperation. I thank my dear colleague Mr. Muhsin Hama Saeed, Mr. Redar Nabi, Mrs. Shna Jamal, MissTara Aziz, Miss Sumaya Khalid, and Mrs. Zhyan Fazil for their helping in cases of need. Also, I offer my deepest appreciation to my colleague Mr. Aram Kamil for his readiness to help me whenever I asked. My deep love and respect go to my sincere parents for their pray and spiritual support. My deep love and thanks to my spouse the one on whom I always depend. He has offered me all spiritual support and encouragement. I see myself as a body with no life without him. He is my soul who gives me energy to move. I really want to thank my sincere brothers and sisters and my darling children for their help and patience with me. A well as, I thanks all my relatives for all their pray and encouragements. In brief, I thank and appreciate everyone who supports me or guides me by a word or even by a gesture.
vi
Abstract A rhetorical question constitutes an essential part of our everyday use of language. Almost no day passes without uttering or hearing a rhetorical question. However, despite the increasing attention paid to this phenomenon by different scholars in different areas, there still exists a clear need to tackle rhetorical question in some genres which are not investigated yet at least in Kurdistan universities. Among these genres is metaphysical poetry with which the current study is concerned. There are certain questions concerning the use of rhetorical question in metaphysical poetry. Among these questions are the frequency and the functions of rhetorical question in sort of poetry, in addition to the influence of the theme of the poem and individuality of the poets themselves on the use of rhetorical question. These questions represent a gap that requires obvious answers. Thus, the current study aims at replying to those questions. The study hypothesizes that rhetorical questions are frequently used in metaphysical poetry for certain pragmatic functions. It also hypothesizes the influence of theme the poem and the individuality of the poets on the use of rhetorical question in the area understudy. To achieve the aims of the study, and verify its hypotheses, two types of procedure have been followed: theoretical and practical. The theoretical part consists of presenting a theoretical framework of rhetorical question including its definitions, classifications, functions, etc. Another presented theoretical framework is that of metaphysical poetry including its salient features, themes, and major metaphysical poets.
vii
The practical part consists of selecting a sample of nine poems by three prominent metaphysical poets: John Donne, George Herbert, and Andrew Marvell. The used rhetorical questions in these poems have been analysed semantically and pragmatically based on an eclectic model adopted for this purpose. The results of the analysis have indicated the frequent use of rhetorical questions in metaphysical poetry for certain pragmatic purposes .The results have also shown the influence of the poem theme and individual style of the poets on the use of rhetorical questions. Accordingly, the hypotheses adopted in this study have been verified.
viii
List of Abbreviations, Acronyms, and Symbols
CG
Common ground
DSA
Direct speech act
Ed
Editorial
Edn
Edition
F
Frequency
FTA
Face threatening act
ISA
Indirect speech act
NPI
Negative polarity item
No.
Number
OQ
Ordinary question
PPI
Positive polarity item
RQ
Rhetorical question
SNPI
Strong negative polarity item
WNPI
Weak negative polarity item
/
Or
_
Empty
#
Awkward
ix
List of Tables
No.
Title
Page
(1) RQs used in Donne's "Break of Day"
69
(2) RQs used in Donne's "The Canonization"
76
(3) RQs used in Donne's "The Good Morrow"
82
(4) RQs used in Marvell's "The Collar"
89
(5) RQs used in Herbert's "Jordan (I)"
96
(6) RQs used in Herbert's "Love (III)"
101
(7) RQs used in Marvell's "A Dialogue between the Resolves Soul and Created Pleasure"
108
(8)
114
RQs used in Marvell's "A Dialogue between the Soul and Body"
(9) RQ used in Marvell's "The Fair Singer"
117
(10) The frequency and percentage of RQs used in Donne's analysed poems
119
(11) The frequency and percentage of RQs used in Herbert's analysed poems 121 (12) The frequency and percentage of RQs used in Marvell's analysed poems
124
(13) The frequency and percentage of RQ used by Donne, Herbert
125
, and Marvell. (14) The total frequency and percentage of RQs used in the whole sample
x
128
Table of Contents Subject
Page
Acknowledgements
v
Abstract
vii
List of Abbreviations and Symbols
ix
List of Tables
x
Table of Contents
xi
Chapter One: Introduction 1.1 Problem and Research Questions
1
1.2 Aims of the Study
1
1.3 Hypotheses
2
1.4 Procedures and Data Collection
2
1.5 Scope of the Study
3
1.6 The Model Adopted
3
1.7 Value of the Study
4
Chapter Two: Rhetorical Question in English 2.1 Literature Review
5
2.1.1 Ladusaw (1980) and Van Rooy (2003)
xi
5
2.1.2 Schaffer (2005)
5
2.1.3 Jameel et al. (2013)
6
2.1.4 Wang (2014)
7
2.2 Rhetorical Question: Definitions 2.2.1 Rhetorical Question as an Assertion
9 9
2.2.2 Rhetorical Question as Information-Seeking Question
10
2.2.3 Rhetorical Question as Redundant Interrogative
11
2.2.4 Rhetorical Question at Cognitive Level
11
2.2.5 Rhetorical Question as a Dual Function
12
2.3 Rhetorical Question vs. Ordinary Question
13
2.4 Rhetorical Question vs. Exclamation Question
15
2.5 Uses of Rhetorical Question
16
2.6 Structural Classification of Rhetorical Question
17
2.6.1 Rhetorical Yes-No question
18
2.6.2 Rhetorical Wh- Question
19
2.6.3 Verbless Rhetorical Question
22
2.7 Semantic Features of Rhetorical Question
22
2.7.1 The Presence of Negative Polarity Items
22
2.7.2 Scalarity of Negative Polarity Items and their Significance in
25
Rhetorical Questions xii
2.7.3 Semantic Functions of Rhetorical Question 2.8 Pragmatic Features of Rhetorical Question
28 29
2.8.1 Rhetorical Question and Indirect Speech Act
29
2.8.2 Indirectness of Rhetorical Question
33
2.8.3 Rhetorical Question and Context
37
2.8.4 Pragmatic Functions of Rhetorical Question
41
2.8.5 The Felicity of Rhetorical Question
48
2.8.6 Answers to Rhetorical Questions
50
2.9 Summary
53
Chapter Three: Metaphysical Poetry in Seventeenth Century 3.1 An Overview of Metaphysical Poetry
54
3.2 Rhetorical Question in Metaphysical Poetry
56
3.3 Characteristics of Metaphysical poetry
56
3.3 .1 Conceit
57
3.3.2 Dramatic Quality
59
3.3.3 Association of Sensibility
60
3.3.4 Language and Theme
60
3.3.5 Wit
61 xiii
3.3.6 Originality
61
3.3.7 Paradox
62
3.3.8 Analytical style
62
3.4 The Major Metaphysical Poets
63
3.5 Summary
63
Chapter Four: Analysis of the Selected Poems 4.1Analysis of the Poems
64
4.2 Analysis of John Donne's Poems
64
4.2.1 "Break of Day"
64
4.2.2 "The Canonization"
70
4.2.3 "The Good- Morrow"
77
4.3 Analysis of George Herbert's Poems
83
4.3.1 "The Collar"
83
4.3.2 "Jordan (1)"
90
4.3.3 "Love (III)"
97
4.4 Analysis of Andrew Marvell's Poems
102
4.4.1 "A Dialogue between the Resolved Soul and Created Pleasure"
102
4.4.2 "A Dialogue between the Soul and Body"
109
xiv
4.4.3 Marvell's "The Fair Singer"
115
4.5 General Discussions of the Results
118
4.5.1 John Donne's Poems
118
4.5.2 George Herbert's Poems
120
4.5.3 Andrew Marvell's Poems
122
4.5.4 A Comparison between Donne, Herbert, and Marvell
124
4.5.5 Summary of the Whole Sample of Poems
127
4.6 Findings
131
Chapter Five: Conclusions and Suggestions for Further Studies 5.1Conclusions
133
5.2 Suggestions for Further Studies
135
References
136
Appendices Appendix (1) Donne's Poems
148
A. "Break of Day"
148
B. "The Canonization"
149
C." The Good-Morrow"
151
Appendix (2) Herbert's Poems A. "The Collar"
152
xv
B. "Jordan(I)"
154
C. "Love(III)"
154
Appendix (3) Marvell's Poems A."A Dialogue between, the Resolved Soul and Created Pleasure" 155 B."A Dialogue between the Soul and Body"
160
C. "The Fair Finger"
162
Abstract (in Kurdish) Abstract (in Arabic)
xvi
Chapter One Introduction 1.1 The Problem and Research Questions A rhetorical question (henceforth RQ) has often attracted the attention of researchers in the area of syntax, literature and other linguistic fields. However, it can be argued that this phenomenon still needs more attention in certain domains. Problems often arise regarding the semantic-pragmatic aspects of RQs in certain literary genres, especially in metaphysical poetry with which this study is concerned. The questions that the current study attempts to answer are: 1. To what extent is the use of RQ frequent in metaphysical poetry? 2. Does the theme of the poem influence the frequency of RQ in metaphysical poetry? 3. What are the main pragmatic functions of using RQ in metaphysical poetry? 4. Do all metaphysical poets employ RQ or is it determined by individualistic style?
1.2 Aims of the Study The study aims at finding out: 1. Whether or not the use of RQ is a characteristic feature of metaphysical poetry. 1
2. The influence of the theme of the poem on the use of RQ. 3. The pragmatic functions behind using RQ in metaphysical poems. 4. Whether or not all metaphysical poets use RQ or it is governed by an individualistic style.
1.3 Hypotheses The study hypothesizes that: 1. Certain features of metaphysical poetry require frequent use of RQs. 2. The theme of the poem influences the use of RQ. 3. Metaphysical poets use RQ for certain pragmatic purposes that cannot be attained by other types of questions. 4. Individual differences can be found between metaphysical poets in terms of the frequency and purposes of using RQ.
1.4 Procedures and Data Collection To achieve the aims of the study and verify its hypotheses, the following procedures have been adopted: 1. Presenting a theoretical framework of RQ in English including its definitions, types, functions, etc. 2. Presenting a theoretical framework of metaphysical poetry including its basic features, themes, etc. 3. Selecting a sample of metaphysical poems and analysing it according to an eclectic model adopted based on the theoretical frameworks mentioned above. 2
4. Comparing the selected poets in terms of the frequency and functions of RQs within their poems by using statistical tools. 5. Drawing conclusions based on the finding of the study.
1.5 Scope of the Study The study is limited to the semantic-pragmatic analysis of RQs in nine poems written by three 17th century metaphysical poets. The selected sample includes three poems for each poet. The following are the selected poets and their poems: 1. John Donne:
a. "Break of Day"
b." The Canonization"
c. "The
Good-Morrow" 2. George Herbert: a. "The Collar"
b. "Jordan (I)"
c. "Love (III)"
3. Andrew Marvell: a. "A Dialogue between the Resolved Soul and Created Pleasure"
b." A Dialogue between the Soul and Body" c. "The Fair Singer"
1.6 The Model Adopted The current study is concerned with RQ which is vague in its nature and the selected genre is poetry (metaphysical poetry) which hardly obeys any rules completely. Consequently, it is preferred to adopt two models: Ilie (1994) and Chueng (2008). Each model is helpful for a certain set of examples. This eclectic model highlights some basic ideas for each, the most prominent ones are: 1.
Ilie (1994: 45-59) mentions these distinctive features of RQ: "(a) The
discrepancy between the interrogative form of the RQ and its communicative function as a statement… (b) Polarity shift between RQ and its implied statement… (c) The addresser's commitment to the implicit answer… (d) The
3
impliciteness and exclusiveness of the answer to the RQ… (e) The multifunctionality of the RQ." These features are used as a general rule. 2. Chueng (2008: 125) states that RQ is "context dependent." Ilie's model is taken as a general rule, but every rule has exceptions. To account for these exceptions, the researcher resorts to Chueng's model in which the context has a dominant position and it is reliable to solve these exceptions, even if it is contradictory with the general rule. For example, a positive wh-question may take a positive answer if its answer is self-evident or contextually explicit otherwise will receive a negative answer and vice versa.
1.7 Value of the Study The present study is hoped to be useful for those interested in the semanticpragmatic aspects of poetic texts, particularly metaphysical poetry. It is also hoped to be valuable for those interested in stylistics, translation studies, sociolinguistics, and discourse analysis.
4
Chapter Two Rhetorical Question in English 2.1 Literature Review To be acquainted with some of the studies that tackled RQs and show to what extent the current study is distinct, the following studies have been briefly reviewed. 2.1.1 Ladusaw (1980) and Van Rooy (2003) Ladusaw's dissertation entitled "Polarity Sensitivity as Inherent Scope Relations" and Van Rooy's article entitled "Negative Polarity Items in Questions: Strength as Relevance" treat RQs as "information-seeking questions." They suggest
that RQs function like regular questions and raise a set of possible
answers. For example, "did John lift a finger to help?" This question raises a set of possible answers as (a ) "yes, John lifted a finger to help" or (b) "no, John did not lift a finger to help." Ladusaw states that a speaker poses a question when the answer is expressible. This question conveys the speaker's belief that no one lifted a finger so the answer (b) is a reasonable answer that the speaker expects. Also, the answer (a) is possible, but because it contains lift a finger without overt negation; it requires significant modifications, for example, "actually, yes, John helped a lot." They conclude that the answers of RQs are informative and cannot be predicted. 2.1.2 Schaffer (2005) Schaffer's article entitled "Can rhetorical questions function as retorts? Is the Pope Catholic?" Schaffer shows that one type has received virtually no attention: the RQ used in response to a preceding question and whose answer is 5
to be recognized as precisely the same as the first question. For example, "How reliable is he?" The answer is "How cold is the sun?" This type is called "the RQ-as-retort." She states that both questions must have the same structure. She defines the RQ-as-retort that "an RQ is offered as a response to a prior question which is a true information, or action-eliciting question." The hearer infers the implicature. The obviousness of the implicature is achieved through appealing to well-known real-world or cultural knowledge, but the positive or negative value of the answers does not usually correlate with the positive or negative value of the RQs themselves. The researcher concludes that this type of RQ is used mostly in conversation, real or fictional, and humorous cases. Only nine out of 178 tokens (5.1%) were found in other contexts where the speaker/writer asks the question and provides the answer as well. 2.1.3 Jameel et al. (2013) This study which is entitled "A Pragmatic Study of Rhetorical Questions in Shakespeare's Twelfth Night and Hamlet" tackles RQs in connection to speech acts because RQs are related to the relation between the addresser and addressee. The study aims at (1) investigating the numbers, employments and the functions of RQs in the two plays; (2) showing the most common pragmatic functions of RQs from speech act ; (3) examining the influence of context on the pragmatic interpretation of RQs; and (4) displaying how RQs are used for different literary purposes in these plays. The study hypothesizes that RQs are more common in Hamlet than in Twelfth Night, and the pragmatic functions of RQs are different in the plays in relation to their contexts. As for the procedures, the researchers first analyse and clarify the two texts of Shakespeare. Then, they come to some conclusions such as: RQs are 6
more common in Hamlet than in Twelfth Night due to their themes because Hamlet deals with the theme of revenge, while Twelfth Night deals with romantic love. Twenty –five RQs are used in Hamlet whereas thirteen ones are used in Twelfth Night. Another conclusion is that context is the focal point to remove the ambiguity of themes or lines of the texts; therefore, the context is the most salient determiner of frequency and function of RQs. 2.1.4 Wang (2014) Wang's study entitled "A Cognitive Pragmatic Study of Rhetorical Questions " establishes the scenario of RQs making statements (called the RQ scenario) which is composed of three components: the BEFORE—the speaker disagrees with the hearer, considering the hearer’s utterance or action as unreasonable, inappropriate and the like and wants the hearer to accept his / her opinion or perform the required action; the CORE—the speaker challenges the hearer to agree with him/her or do the required action and its immediate RESULT—the hearer is challenged to agree with the speaker or do something as is required; and the AFTER—the hearer will agree with the speaker or do the action as required. It is held that in the RQ scenario, each component bears a metonymic relationship to the other components and to the whole. So, by highlighting one of the three components of the scenario, the speaker is making statements when asking RQs (Wang, ibid: 41).Wang's study is done from a metonymic point of view based on the materials collected from some classical English novels. The study ends up with some conclusions. First, RQs perform indirect speech acts. RQs are inherently indirect, because the speaker has no intention of eliciting answer or information from the hearer in posing RQs. Instead, s/he is making statements by asking RQs. Second, on the basis of the theory of speech act metonymy, the RQ scenario was established. Speech act and its felicity 7
conditions are best described in a scenario composed of three parts: the BEFORE, the CORE/RESULT and the AFTER, each of which bears a metonymic relation to the whole. Finally, Wang (2014: 46) expounds that "A rhetorical question is employed after the speaker has been attacked, blamed or accused by the hearer. In this environment, a RQ is made use of to counterattack the hearer. Because the speaker considers the answer to be self-evident, s/he will not stop to wait for to answer but goes on with his/her speech". Although all the above studies are concerned with RQs, but the current study differs from these either in focus or the register understudy. The current study is different from Ladusaw and Van Rooy's studies in terms of the adopted model. Ladusaw and Van Rooy treat RQs as information- seeking questions and their studies are semantic. It also differs from Schaffer's study which is only pragmatic study and treats RQs as answers to the previous information-seeking questions. Again, the current study is different from the study of Jameel et al. and the study of Wang. Both are pragmatic study but they are different in their genres. The former is concerned with Shakespeare's Twelfth Night and Hamlet while, the latter is concerned with some collected examples from English classical novels. Therefore, the current study is different from the previous studies in that RQs have been investigated thoroughly in metaphysical poetry from a semantic-pragmatic perspective.
8
2.2 Rhetorical Question: Definitions Koshik (2003, cited in Abioye, 2011: 291) defines RQ as "this interrogative form is as difficult to define as it is communicatively successful." RQs are everywhere as a question-type, but due to their "vague nature" they are hardly ever defined with any exactness or clarity (Estes, 2013: 51). RQs have been defined in various ways by scholars that can be grouped upon different titles. Below is a brief account of each: 2.2.1 Rhetorical Question as an Assertion Quirk et al. (1985: 825-26) define RQ as "interrogative in structure, but has the force of a strong assertion. Generally, it does not expect an answer." It communicates opposite assertion. That is a positive rhetorical yes-no question is equivalent to a strong negative assertion and vice versa. As well as, a positive wh-question is similar to a statement that a negative element is replaced the whquestion. A negative wh-question conveys a statement that a positive element is replaced the wh-question. Han (2002:202) similarly, confirms the views by Quirk et al. (ibid). She states that RQ is "semantically equivalent to an assertion of the opposite polarity from what is apparently asked." Consider the following examples: (1)
a. DID I tell you that writing a dissertation was easy? b. Didn’t I tell you that writing a dissertation was easy? c. What hasn’t John done for Sam?
Example (1a) implies that "I didn’t tell you that writing a dissertation was easy", while (1b) represents that "I told you that writing a dissertation was easy." Also example (1c) asserts that "John has done everything for Sam."
9
However, Rudanko (1993 cited in Schaffer, 2005: 443) modifies this rule to account for exceptions. For yes-no questions, only those with sentence negation where the whole proposition is negated will require positive answers, for example, "Is the system of jurisprudence not necessary? Yes, it is necessary." While positive questions and those with constituent negation will require negative answers, for example, "Is the system of jurisprudence unnecessary? No, it is not unnecessary." As for wh-question, positive question may take positive answer when the answer is self-evident in context, for example, "Who brought you into this world, anyway? You, mom." Also negative question may do so as well with the same condition. On the contrary, positive wh-question which its answer is not contextually explicit will receive a negative answer and vice versa. Moshavi (2009: 32-3) defines an RQ as an implicit assertion not a request for information. RQ occurs in context in which either the speaker believes that the implicated assertion is obvious by both the speaker and the hearer or the speaker attempts to persuade the hearer to accept it. 2.2.2 Rhetorical Question as Information-Seeking Question Ladusaw (1980:150-51) and Van Rooy (2003:240) treat RQs as really information-eliciting questions which take a set of possible answers. Consider example: (2) Did John lift a finger to help? a) No, John did not lift a finger to help. b) Actually, yes/yes, he helped some. In (2), the question conveys the speaker’s belief that no one lifted a finger. Thus the answer (a) is the only answer that the speaker expects. But, if, as a matter of fact, John did help some, then the hearer must express some proposition, which 10
explains the range of help such as(b) yes, he helped some / actually, yes, rather than simply ‘yes, he did’. 2.2.3 Rhetorical Question as Redundant Interrogative Rohde (2006:135,163) treats RQs as redundant interrogatives. They are neither information seeking like ordinary questions, nor information-providing like statements. RQ is redundant, because the obviousness of particular answer implies the bias of an assertion. So, the answer is predictable by both the speaker and addressee. As a result, there is no new information. However, one can have a contradictory view to that of Rohde, for it can be argued that RQ is not redundant simply because it is frequently used in certain areas including the Holly Quran. So, if it is redundant, it would not be used. In Holly Quran, it is used for many purposes. No doubt, this is a strong evidence to reject the redundancy of RQ. On other hand, there is nothing introduced by human being without purpose, even if only a word.
2.2.4 Rhetorical Question at Cognitive Level Ilie (1994: 124) defines RQ as that question which is used as "a challenging statement to convey the addresser’s commitment to its implicit answer in order to induce the addressee’s mental recognition of its obviousness and acceptance, verbalized or non-verbalized, of its validity." Similarly, Aitchison (1996: 245) defines an RQ as "a form of thinking aloud rather than a request for information." For example: (3) Let me see. Should I take the car or go by bus?
11
2.2.5 Rhetorical Question as a Dual Function Niazi and Gautam (2010: 271) define RQs as "may or may not have the illocutionary force of questioning, but always bear the force of an indirect assertion." Estes (2013: 49) describes RQs as "those that do not seek information as primary point of the asking, though they may ask information as a secondary objective." The definition can be interpreted like that there are questions with a strong rhetorical quality and a mild informational quality. The relations between these two qualities (rhetorical and informational) are unsystematic. The qualities become more or less prominent dependency on the context (ibid: 52). For instance: (4) Why God, why me? Traditionally, RQs are defined as questions that
do not expect answers and
they are not understood in their literal manner. It can be said that this definition is not applied to all RQs. Example (4) is a type of RQs which does not obey this definition totally. If this question described as a totally rhetorical or a totally informational question, it would be inaccurate. It does not assert opposite to the question. This type of question can be described as "a question with a strong rhetorical quality and a mild informational quality. If a person asks this question aloud, it is quite possible when s/he receives an answer (ibid: 51). As a researcher, building on what have been stated above, RQ can be defined or realized semantically, mainly as a strong bias towards a certain type of assertion and often as a dual function behind its assertion; it has the illocutionary force of questioning. Pragmatically, an RQ is a saviour, bidirectional which involves: (deceiver and non-deceiver), smart/diplomatic, and economic means. It is saviour because of its indirectness by which both faces can be saved. As for a deceiver, it means that the speaker can illustrate what s/he 12
wants under the cover of question form and its indirectness; so it leaves a space for obscurity.
On the other hand, the non- deceiver means indicates that
although the speaker commits a type of answer implicitly under the cover of question form, the context has authority to interpret an RQ clearly. It is smart/ diplomatic, because it highlights the speaker's viewpoint softly. It is economic since one RQ can hold more than one function.
2.3 Rhetorical Question vs. Ordinary Question Ilie (1999:979) holds that "answer-eliciting or information-eliciting questions are normally regarded as standard questions, while the questions that do not exhibit a primarily answer-eliciting or information-eliciting function will be referred to as non-standard questions." Sadock (1971, cited in Han, 2002:203-4) indicates the following points to show that RQs are formally assertions and that they differ formally from information-seeking ordinary questions (henceforth OQs) 1. The expression after all, can occur with RQs, but cannot occur with OQs. Consider (5a& 5b) which can only be interpreted as RQs. (5) a. After all, does Fred have a red cent? b. After all, who helped Mary when she was in trouble? 2. RQs can be followed by a clause headed by the item yet, but this is not possible with OQs .Therefore, (6a & 6b) can be interpreted only as RQs. (6) a. Did I receive help from anybody? Yet, I managed to complete my tasks on time. b. Who helped Mary? Yet, she managed everything by herself. It can be concluded that RQs in (6a & 6b) are assertions, which do not expect answers because in the (yet-clauses) the answers are indicated obviously. 13
3. The phrase by any chance, can occur only with OQs. So, examples (7a & 7b) can be interpreted only as OQs. (7) a. Is John coming, by any chance? b. Who helped Mary, by any chance? Sadock (1971, cited in Caponigro and Sprouse, 2007: 2-3) adds other points to distinguish RQs from OQs: 4. If an interrogative clause is introduced by I’m really curious or I really don’t know, then it can be an OQ as in (8a & 8b). (8) a. I’m really curious: who helped Luca where he was in trouble? b. I really don’t know: who helped Luca when he was in trouble? 5. If a question contains a strong negative polarity item like: lift a finger, budge an inch, eat a bite, give a damn, a red cent, etc., then it can only be an RQ, as the following examples: (9) a. After all, who lifted a finger to help Luca? b. Who gave a damn when Paolo was in trouble? Yet, he made it. Caponigro and Sprouse (ibid: 7) indicate two points to distinguish RQs from OQs. First, the situation in which an RQ can be used is not the same as that of an OQ. That is, an OQ can be used in a situation, if the answer is known only by the addressee, while an RQ is used in a situation where the answer is known by both the speaker and the addressee. Second, with OQs, answers are obligatory and they are given or decided by the addressee. Whereas, answers to RQs are optional and they are given either by the speaker or the addressee .These two points are illustrated in (10) & (11) below. (10) Who helped Mary when she was in trouble? 14
a. Nobody/ Someone. (By the addressee) b. # Nobody/ # Someone. (By the speaker) In example (10), the speaker does not know that Mary was helped or not. Then, the question can be interpreted only as an OQ and only the addressee can answer. If the speaker answers (nobody/someone), it represents awkward. The situation is different in example (11), the speaker and the addressee are aware of what happened to Mary. Actually, where nobody helped her, and both know that the other is aware of that as well. Thus, the question can be interpreted only as an RQ. Both the speaker and the addressee can answer it; nevertheless, none of them are obliged. (11) It’s understandable that Mary doesn’t trust people any more. After all, who helped her when she was in trouble? a. Nobody / No answer. (By the addressee) b. Nobody / No answer. (By the speaker)
2.4 Rhetorical Question vs. Exclamation Question Moshavi (2009:38-9) states that RQs can be answered, while exclamations cannot. Furthermore, RQs and exclamations have extremely different implications; the former imply their contradictory polarity, but the latter do not imply their contrary polarity. Consider examples (12) & (13). (12) How will this fellow save us? (13) How awesome is this place! Example (12) implies that "This fellow cannot save us", while example (13) implies that "This place is very awesome."
15
2.5 Uses of Rhetorical Question Abioye (2009: 4) categories some uses of RQs as shown below:
a) RQ can be used as a title of books, articles, TV programmes, etc. This type highlights or gives prominence to anew topic, especially at the beginning of discourse. Usually, such RQs are used to draw attention and lead to further discussion on the subject or topic as in the following examples: (14) Who wants to be a millionaire? (TV Programme). (15) When will fuel scarcity end? (Title of an editorial).
b) Sometimes RQ is self-addressed. It is usually used in monologues or in songs as in: (16) What shall I say unto the Lord? All I have to say is 'thank you Lord.' c) It can also be used to "Wrap-up discourse" in a conclusion-statement depending on preceding discourses. So, it is used as a means to close a discourse, as in the following example which means "I have said all that has to be said." (17)
What else can I say?’
d) An RQ is often used as a crucial means in courtroom where they suggest what the answer should be, to declare a statement, for instance: when the prisoner is asked a question in which the RQ is a leading question as in: (18) You saw the accused at the scene of the crime, didn’t you? Schaffer (2005:436) and Estes (2013: 140-1) hold that RQs can be used in response to a preceding question, which is called "RQ as-retort." The answer of
16
the previous question which is OQ combines with its answer, which must be inferred easily by the hearer. Consider the examples below: (19) How you like school? How you like prison? Blankenship and Graig (2006: 111) state that RQs are used for advertising. As it is known, advertisements dominate /include many fields in human daily life, especially commercial field. Abioye (2011: 291) and Van Eemeren et al. (2005, cited in Henkemans, 2009: 16) also indicate that an RQ is a common means to forward viewpoint and argument. So, it can be seen as a proposal for starting points in a discussion and a thought to stimulate it. A proposal is started by one party and offered to another party to accept a certain proposition as a shared point for starting. It is worth noting that the other party can accept or refuse this proposal, or accept it on condition. Such RQs are used frequently during debates. For example: (20) Why Google's rent-a-book program would not work. Isn't true that libraries do not have many of the popular titles even if they are bestsellers? Example (20) does not have a typical answer; the answer is based on individual opinion. Therefore, such RQs are used for stimulating new thought and opening a discussion.
2.6 Structural Classification of Rhetorical Question Quirk et al. (1985: 825, 845) and Koshik (2005: 11) distinguish three types of RQs: rhetorical yes-no question, rhetorical wh-question and verbless RQ. Below is an account of each:
17
2.6.1 Rhetorical Yes-No Question Quirk et al. (1985: 825-6) display that a positive rhetorical yes-no question is equivalent to a strong negative assertion, whereas a negative rhetorical question is equivalent to a strong positive one. Consider the following examples: (21)
Is that a reason for desPAIR?
(22)
Isn’t the answer OBvious?
Example (21) implies that surely it is not a reason, while (22), implies that surely the answer is obvious. Han (2002: 214) claims that, in general, a positive yes-no question has no implications as revealing speakers’ expectations towards a certain answer. However, sometimes by focusing on the auxiliary verb; it represents the speakers’ expectation towards a certain answer which is a negative answer. See example (1a), section (2.2.1). Heritage (2002: 1428) states that negative yes-no questions are not always understood as information seeking questions, especially those grammatically questions which begin with ‘Isn’t it……,’ ‘Doesn’t this………,’ and ‘Don’t you…….’ ; these questions are assumed as expressing a position or point of view. Consider the example (23), which can be interpreted as 'she is very beautiful.' (23) Isn’t she a doll? Quirk et al. (1985:1478) state that tag questions are like RQs, since they may seek confirmation of what the speaker explicitly assumes to be true as in (24): (24) It is a glorious day, isn’t it? Yes, it is. 18
It can be pointed out that tag questions may not request information. Then, what the addressee does, is not more than confirming and acknowledging the speaker’s propositions. 2.6.2 Rhetorical Wh- Question Han (2002: 216) and Swan (2005: 467) state that negative wh-questions have implications that convey speaker’s expectations towards a positive answer. Consider the following example; where the speaker expects that most people finished the paper: (25)
Who didn’t finish the paper?
Generally, a positive wh-question is an arguable subject in terms of speaker’s
implications. Han (ibid: 217) states that in general, a positive wh-
question has no implications as the speaker’s expectations towards a definite answer. However, sometimes when the main verb is focused on, it implies that the speaker expects a negative answer (i.e. negative orientation) as in (26), in which the speaker expects that most people didn’t finish the paper: (26) Who FINSHed the paper? Examples (25) and (26) can be distinguished as follows: example (25) is used when the speaker assumes that most people finished the paper, and wants to know who didn’t finish it .On the contrary, example (26) is used when the speaker assumes that most people did not finish the paper, and wants to know who indeed finished it. Quirk et al. (1985:826) and Bolinger (1957, cited in Koshik 2005 : 40 ) claim that positive rhetorical wh-question is equivalent to an assertion in which the rhetorical wh- question is replaced by a negative element such as 'nobody', 19
'nothing', 'nowhere', 'none', 'no reason', etc. Consider example (27) which implies that nobody knows: (27) What do you think will happen? Who knows….? Swan (2005: 467) indicates that the answer of positive rhetorical whquestion is either obviously no (i. e. the wh-question replaced by negative element) or there is not answer to the question (i.e. the RQ has not answer, even the questioner her/himself does not know the answer. Consider the example below in which the wh-question word is replaced by nothing: (28)
Who do you think you are?
Example (28) implies that the addressee is not as important as his/her behaviour suggests. In other words, it reveals that you are nothing. So, the wh-question is replaced by a negative element. In contrast to Quirk et al. (1985: 826) and Bolinger (1957, cited in Koshik, 2005: 40); Rohde (2006:137-38) and Egg (2007: 77) display that whphrase in affirmative RQs are not always necessarily replaced by negative elements. Consider example (29), where a teacher enters one of pupils’ classes and asks them: the intended meaning is ‘you are’ responsible. So, questions like that must be treated exceptionally. (29)
Well, who is responsible for this mess?
It can be drawn out that a positive rhetorical wh-question is not always negatively biased; that is, the wh-question word may be positively biased and replaced by someone or something.
20
Koshik (2005:52) indicates that the most prominent types of rhetorical wh-questions are: 1. Why / How should….? These types can be used to reject suggestions, requests, and instructions (Swan, 2005: 467). Nkemleke (2005: 52) claims that 'why should' represents an idiomatic usage which conveys the speaker’s annoyance toward a supposed obligation. Consider the following examples: (30) a. Could your wife help us in the office tomorrow? Why should she? b. What time does the film start? How should I know? (Swan, ibid) Example (30a) implies rejection; the excuse may be that "she doesn’t work for you.", whereas example (30b) implies an aggressive reply to a question. 2. Why…? Why question can also be used to complain, criticize or make suggestion. (31) Why do you waste time with trivial things? 4.
Who cares….? Who cares very often implicates that nobody cares. (32) I can run faster than him, who cares? (Ibid).
5. How could….? How could is used to deny something or criticize. (33) a. How could you think I did that? b. How couldn’t you remember? (Quirk et al., 1985:826) 21
Example (33a) denies the hearer’s opinion who thinks that the speaker did something. The speaker denies that it means "s/he didn’t do that". On the other hand, example (33b) implies challenging or criticizing the prior turns. So, the question implies that "you certainly should have remembered." 2.6.3 Verbless Rhetorical Question Quirk et al. (1985:845) distinguish two types of verbless rhetorical whquestion: a literary and somewhat archaic type of verbless
rhetorical wh-
question that follows a clause which begins with but as in (34).The other type is less formal, which contains a comparison as in (35): (34) Who so honest but some will doubt his integrity? (35) Who more fitting than you?
2.7 Semantic Features of Rhetorical Question The presence of negative polarity items and scalarity of negative items and their significance in RQs are highlighted in detail in the following sub-sections. 2.7.1 The Presence of Negative Polarity Items Polarity is defined by Cruse (2006:130) as "one term of a binary opposition as positive and the other as negative." Sadock (1974: 82-3) states that polarity items are words as "already" or phrases as" a red cent"; they are sensitive to affirmativeness or negativeness of semantic context such as negative polarity items (henceforth NPIs) which occur mainly in grammatically negative contexts and positive polarity items (henceforth PPIs) which occur in positive contexts as in the following examples: 22
(36) I don’t have a red cent. (37) John left already. The occurrence of NPIs and PPIs are reversed in RQs. That is NPIs appear only in "positive" contexts, and PPIs in 'negative' contexts as in: (38)
After all, does Fred have a red cent?
(39)
After all, didn’t jack leave already?
Rexach (1998:145) distinguishes two classes of NPIs: weak and strong NPIs. Expressions such as any , anybody, anything, yet, etc. are weak NPIs, and expressions like give a damn, at all, budge an inch, in years, a bit, lift a finger, etc. , are strong NPIs. Both weak NPI (henceforth WNPI) and strong NPI (henceforth SNPI) are licensed in interrogative sentences although they do not have the same distribution. Rexach (ibid) and Han (2002: 209) state that when a NPI occurs in a question, the rhetorical interpretation is triggered, especially when a SNPI occurs in a question. Krifka (1995: 17) indicates that SNPIs are "non-exhaustive", they occur in emphatic assertions. Reese and Asher (2007: 8) also support this idea; they state that SNPIs convey bias toward a negative answer. However; SNPIs can only be used with RQs as it is pointed in section (2.3). Consider the examples: (40)
Who bats an eye when the boss comes around?
(41)
Did Fred contribute a red cent to the campaign?
Example (40) implies that nobody bats an eye when the boss comes around, while (41) implies that Fred did not pay anything.
23
Han (2002: 201) illustrates that RQs and OQs are not similar in spite of various share conditions, such as WNPIs. They are licensed in both RQs and OQs. Both SNPIs and WNPIs are licensed in rhetorical positive yes-no questions. The problem relates with the occurrence of WNPIs because they can occur with both OQs and RQs. Some clues can help to distinguish between the occurrence of WNPIs in OQs and RQs. These clues can be stated as follows: 1. According to Han (ibid: 222-3), RQs must have negative single answers. Under the light of this view, she mentions that WNPIs are licensed if RQs are used as negative assertions, but they are not licensed when RQs are used as positive assertions. Both weak and strong NPIs are not licensed in rhetorical negations, because the two negations cancel out each other; so they are interpreted as positive assertions. In example (42) the speaker asserts that Sam never agreed with anyone; while in (43), the speaker asserts that nobody said anything at the semantics seminar. (42) Who has Sam ever agreed with? (43) What did anybody say at the semantics seminar? 2. Rexach (1998: 147) and Reese and Asher (2007: 8) suggest that the speaker can clarify to the hearer the difference
between the two readings, i.e. the
rhetorical and none-rhetorical. If WNPI is stressed, the rhetorical reading is intended by the speaker. On the contrary, if WNPI is unstressed, then the nonrhetorical reading is intended. So, the negative bias can be associated with WNPIs. Consider below examples. (44)
a. Does John read anything? (Ambiguous) b. Does John read anything? (OQs) 24
c. Does John read ANYthing? (RQs) Question (44a) can be given a dual reading; so it is ambiguous. While example (44b) can be interpreted just as OQ in which the speaker wants to know whether John read anything or not. Example (44c) can be interpreted as RQ which conveys the speaker’s belief that John doesn’t read anything.
2.7.2 Scalarity of Negative Polarity Items and their Significance in Rhetorical Questions NPIs obey this constraint "Bottom of Scale Principle: SNPIs always denote elements at the bottom of contextually associated scale, and SNPIs may also denote bottom of scale elements" Krifka (1991, cited in Rexach, 1998: 152). SNPIs can be analysed as "Idiomatic expressions that denote minimal elements of certain ontological sorts." For example, 'A drop' denotes minimal quantities of liquid. 'A word' denotes minimal utterances. 'A red cent ' denotes minimal amounts of money, 'Lift a finger' denotes minimal amounts of labour. 'Bat an eye' applies to the least reactions to threatening events. These utterances have to be understood in their nonliteral meaning. Consider the following example: (45)
John didn’t lift a finger to help Sara.
Example (45) depends on the Bottom of Scale Principle. The presence of the NPI lift a finger entails that John did not perform even the minimal action to help her. A criterion to determine the scale is effort or willingness; how much effort or willingness needs to perform a certain action. Clearly, the effort of lifting a finger is at the bottom of that scale as in (46): (46) Did John lift a finger to help Sara? Lift a finger in (46), under the effect of SNPI, triggers the question to have a rhetorical reading .So, it is negatively biased which leads to a certain interpretation that John didn’t do anything to save her; even he didn’t spend a minimal effort (Krifka, 1995: 23) . 25
It is worth noting that, another interpretation can be drawn from the expression ‘lift a finger’. It may refer to the top of the scale and accounting it as the greatest effort, surely, with providing a special context. For example, lifting a finger by parliamentarian in a parliament hall may denote the top of scale, because by this may lead to a rule which may save the life of one or many people. WNPIs as pointed depending upon the Bottom of Scale Principle may also be used to denote bottom of the scale elements. WNPIs like ‘anything’ can be used as weak and strong as well (Krifka, 1995: 14). For examples: (47)
a. Mary didn’t get anything for her birthday. b.
Mary didn’t get ANYthing (at all) for her birthday.
Example (47a), just presents that Mary got nothing. While (47b) by focal stress on 'any', presents the fact that Mary didn’t even get some minor thing for her birthday. SNPIs involve minimizers and maximizers. Minimizers, i.e. idioms like the faintest idea, lift a finger, sleep a wink, etc. SNPIs contain a ‘silent even’. Questions with minimizers (unlike any and ever) are always negatively biased (Guerzoni, 2004:313). Israel (2004: 19) claims that minimizers are used to convey an emphatic negation. Guerzoni (ibid: 320) indicates that minimizers reduce the set of the possible answers to a question to a single answer which is negative. Minimizers and even denote a lower scale-end point. Consider example in (48): (48) Did you have (even) the faintest idea of how hard I’m working?
Heim (1984, cited in Van Rooy, 2003:254) illustrates that if 'even' occurs with SNPIs like 'lift a finger', it doesn’t have semantic or pragmatic effect. This exhibits that these strong NPIs share the presupposition of 'even'. 26
In contrast to the opinion of Heim, it can be argued that when 'even' occurs with strong NPIs, it can have more pragmatic effect and more strengthening of the negation. It reduces the chance of answering if, it can be answered originally, and limits the answer only to 'no' as in (49a & 49b): (49)
a.
Did Paiwand even lift a finger to help Soma?
b. Did Paiwand lift a finger to help soma? Example (49a) cannot be answered positively because the word 'even' gives more power and strengthens the expression 'lift a finger'. So, it refutes any answer except 'No'; it reveals speaker’s certainty and suggests that the speaker is aware of all the detail about both Paiwand and Soma. While in (49b) by removing the word ‘even’ the amount of speaker’s certainty and awareness is softly reduced; and as it is pointed in section (2.2.2 e.g. 2) it may be answered positively, although, this likelihood is rare. Comparing the following two examples in a situation when a teacher evaluates two pupils’ answers such as 'yes, very good' and 'yes, very very good,' could make the above account more indicative. Maximizers, as they are explained by Israel (2001:300), are idiomatic expressions like in a million years, in years, and in ages. Van Rooy (2003:21) claims that questions with maximizers have rhetorical reading. Consider example (50): where the speaker’s expectation is obvious and the question is negatively biased. (50) Would you, in a million years, do that? However, the question to be raised at this point is why the questions with SNPIs are only negatively biased? The reasons for this, according to Guerzoni (2004: 321) can be attributed to the semantic meaning of the SNPIs, hence, the positive answer signs incongruity; or it could be related to pragmatics. The 27
positive answer contrasts with speaker’s presupposition. Since the speaker when uses SNPIs
s/he prefers or expects a negative answer, so the positive answer
does not concord with speaker’s preference as in: (51) Does Sue have the faintest idea of how hard I’m working? Consequently, the question with SNPIs denotes its minimal value. 2.7. 3 Semantic Functions of Rhetorical Question Van Rooy (2003: 263) states that a question will have a minimal value if one answer is likely to be true rather than the other. So, a sentence has minimal value if biases towards a certain type of answer. It can be said that an RQ has a minimal value in terms of its answer if it compares with an OQ because mainly the answer of Rhetorical yes-no question is either positively or negatively biased (i.e. one answer is preferred/highlidhted rather than the other). Han (2002: 210-13) and Yoon (2011: 14) state that semantic of an OQ is equivalent to a set of possible answers. An ordinary Yes-No question has two choices (yes/no) and an ordinary wh-question has a set of answers. So, if a question has a strong bias towards a certain answer, it is not treated as an OQ. This is so because asserting is the main function of RQ, although it may have another function, which is asking, but it is not treated as a primary function as it is interpreted in section (2.2.5). That is why when the addressee answers to an RQ, the answer appears as a reaction towards a statement or confirms someone's statement not as a normal answer towards an OQ. Consequently, it can be concluded that RQ mainly does not function as an OQ because a set of possible answer with OQ will be reduced to one possible/acceptable answer 28
2.8 Pragmatic Features of Rhetorical Question Certain pragmatic features play an important role in the interpretation of RQs; the most important of which are stated in the following sub-sections. 2.8.1 Rhetorical Question and Indirect Speech Act Schegloff (1984and 1995, cited in Koshik 2005: 2) states that questions are not always used to seek new information. Questions are commonly used as 'a vehicle' for performing other actions such as invitations, offers, complaints, and requests. One type of questions known as performing something other than seeking information is the RQ. Indirect speech act (henceforth ISA) is defined as an act that is "indirectly performed by performing another act" (Searle 2001, cited in Asher and Lascarides, 2001:183). RQ also can be seen as an indirect use of language, because in RQ, an assertion is performed by performing another act, which is interrogative (Wang, 2014: 43). RQ in terms of its role as an ISA is likened to a bridge that fills the gap between its literal meaning as a question and its role as a statement (Egg, 2007: 77). Example (52) is an ISA of rebuking or accusation. The intended meaning is "you are responsible for this chaos." (52) Well, who is responsible for this chaos? So, both ISA and an RQ perform a speech act indirectly by performing another speech act, which is direct. Searle et al. (1980: 98) suggest that "most of the things which have traditionally been called rhetorical questions would now come under the headings of indirect speech acts." Searle and Vanderveken (1985: 1) define speech acts as "the minimal units of human communication," therefore, by
29
making statements, issuing commands, asking questions, etc. speech acts are performed. There are two kinds of speech acts: direct (henceforth DSAs) and indirect. DSAs are recognized by the direct relation between their structural forms and their communicative functions; that is, their structural forms have a systematic relation with their functions, such as: declarative form functions as an assertion. On the contrary, ISAs are recognized by the indirect relation between their structural forms and their communicative functions like RQs. In other words, there is no matching between the forms and the functions such as interrogative form which functions as a request (Yule, 1996: 54-5). Austin (1962, cited in Paltridge, 2006: 55) argues that there are three kinds of acts, which occur with everything we utter, or we do. These are: locutionary, illocutionary, and perlocutionary acts. Locutionary acts refer to literal meaning of what is said. That is, the uttered utterance determinates meaning and reference. Consider example (53), which refers to temperature no more no less. The utterance does not hold any hidden meaning. (53)
It’s hot in here.
Illocutionary acts refer to the speaker’s intention in uttering, which is beyond the literal meaning. So, what someone says often has both a literal and illocutionary meaning (or illocutionary force). Therefore, example (53) is not only referring to temperature, it may also be requesting someone to do something such as turn on the air conditioner. Searle and Vanderveken (1985: 1) state that when a speaker utters a sentence in an appropriate context with certain intentions, s/he performs one or more illocutionary acts. They also state that
30
illocutionary act consists of "an illocutionary force and a propositional content." For example: (54) a. You will leave the room. b. Leave the room. These two utterances have the same propositional content; but characteristically the first (54a) has the illocutionary "force of prediction" while, the second (54b) has the illocutionary force of "an order" (Searle and Vanderveken (1985: 1). Perlocutionary acts refer to the effect of what is said on the hearer’s thought and action such as the action of turning on the air conditioner. Therefore, the perlocutionary act is the hearer’s reaction due to the illocutionary effect, Austin (1962, cited in Paltridge, 2006: 55). Searle (1965, cited in Finch, 2005: 173) classifies speech acts into five categories: commissives, declaratives, directives, expressives, and representatives (assertives). Finch (ibid) defines commsives as "those kinds of speech acts which commit the speaker to some future course of action." Searle and Vanderveken (1985:192) indicate that through commisives speech acts; accepting, assuring, offering, promising, refusing, and threatening can be performed by the speaker. Consider example (55), in which threatening is presented. (55) If you don’t stop fighting, I’ll call the police.
31
Declaratives involve these speech acts: declaring, approving, confirming, and nominating (Searle and Vanderveken (1985:195). Yule (1996:53) states that declarative speech acts are those that "change the world via their utterance." Similarly, Finch (2005:173) confirms Yule’s opinion, and shows that an utterance can make immediate changes in the institutional state affairs, for example, in declaring war/peace, marrying/divorcing, firing/employing, etc. As example (56), during the wedding ceremony when the priest says: (56) I now pronounce you husband and wife. Searle and Vanderveken (1985: 198) describe directives as the attempt to get the hearer to do something as the speaker wants. Either the hearer is allowed the option of refusing or not. Through directives these acts can be performed: asking, commanding, suggesting, requesting, and urging. In example (57) commanding is uttered: (57) Leave here now. In expressives speech acts, the speaker expresses his/her attitude and feeling about a state of affairs. The speaker expresses his/her happiness, grief, likes, and dislikes about a matter. They include these acts: apologizing, complaining, congratulating, praising, thanking, welcoming, boasting, deploring, protesting, and greeting (ibid: 211). In the below example, praising is presented: (58)
He is very kind.
Representatives (assertives) are those kinds of speech acts that "commit the speaker to the truth of the expressed proposition." The speaker wants to make the hearer believe the truth of what s/he said. In performing these speech acts; the speaker expresses her/his belief and manipulates the words to be 32
appropriate with his/her beliefs and wants (Huang, 2009: 1004). These speech acts involve: asserting, boasting, claiming, affirming, admitting, denying, accusing, blaming, criticizing, complaining, reminding, and predicting (Searle and Vanderveken, 1985: 183). In the following example predicting is presented: (59) I expect that he will pass all the exams. 2.8.2 Indirectness of Rhetorical Question RQs can perform ISAs of assertive and directive. Thus, the most distinctive feature of RQ is indirectness (Chen, 2011: 609).Thomas (1995: 133) states that indirectness is used intentionally and rationally. As far as RQs are concerned, people often prefer using RQs rather than stating straightforwardly a declarative form due to various reasons among which are: 1. The purpose of RQs is not to elicit a response but to assert indirectly such as complaining, criticizing, accusing or denying. These acts are performed implicitly through the intended assertion. Thus, RQ is used as a means for expressing speaker’s attitudes and wants that might be challenged or denied by the hearers if asserted directly( Abioye 2011: 231) . 2. Two important reasons should be taken into account: (a) Face and (b) power and status. As for face, Brown and Levinson (1978, cited in Chen, 2011: 612) suggest that when we interact with others, it is necessary to keep our face and avoid threatening another’s face. Yule (1996:61) defines a face threatening act (henceforth FTA) as an "utterance or action which threatens a person’s self-image." Brown and Levinson (1987, cited in Lee, 2007: 53, 56) define face as "the public self-image that every member wants to claim for himself." They also claim that politeness is equated with protection of 'face'. They indicate that certain acts are inherently threatening to face such as commands, requests, and all other types of 33
directives. These acts inherently damage the face of the hearer or the speaker, by acting in an opposite way to the wants and desires of the participants. Thus, to avoid FTAs, indirectness is used rather than directness, to soften the threat of face and reducing imposition on the hearer. As for power and status, power is defined as an unequal or asymmetrical relationship between two or more participants while status refers to social positions that society gives to its members or the difference between social groups, in terms of prestige related with them by others (Van Herk, 2012: 208, 211). RQ can be used to make command. Making command indirectly through RQ is beneficial to avoid face threatening. For instance, "Shouldn’t you stay at home?" When it is asked by a father to his daughter who gives an indirect order to his daughter. He doesn’t tell his daughter directly but indirectly makes her understand that her father really does not like her to go out. This is often used in our daily life and can make our life and interaction go smoothly (Chen, 2011:612). On the other hand, when the speaker has asymmetrical status than the hearer (i. e., the hearer has a higher status and authority) RQ is the best means to the speaker to illustrate what he wants indirectly and softly. Consequently, RQ is the most appropriate way for both the speaker and the hearer if they are in asymmetrical situation. 3. The valuable function of RQs is to enable speakers to use indirectness to soften and minimize face risks; they have a shared function, to strengthen assertion and soften criticism (Frank, 1990: 726-27). Schaffer (2005: 434) explains how RQ strengthens assertion; she states that the speaker manipulates the words in a style that impresses the hearers and would 34
logically lead to the kind of answer that the speaker intended. So, it enables speakers to make stronger statements. 4. RQ is indirectly used to make implicature and the hearer is required to infer what is said by the speaker. Implicature is "an additional conveyed meaning; it is something more than just what the words mean"(Yule, 1996: 35). Inference is "additional information used by the listener to create a connection between what is said and what must be meant"(Yule, 2006: 116).Thomas (1995: 58) displays that the main difference between implicature and inference is that an implicature is composed intentionally by the speaker and may or may not be understood by the hearer. On the contrary, an inference is done by the hearer.
Andueza (2011: 114)
confirms that RQs cannot be considered as structures, which need a difficult inference, but rather they are easily inferable because the context in which they are used will exclude the implicatures which are nonrelevant. Sperber and Wilson (1986, cited in Andueza, ibid: 113) state that an utterance is relevant in a context when it has some contextual effects in that context. Common knowledge (which is background knowledge about various areas of life in the world) has an influential role to make the RQ relevant. For example, in the case of RQs are used as retorts as in: (60) a. Does John drink? b. Is Clinton a liberal? The background knowledge identifies the answer to (60b) and makes the question (60b) relevant to the answer of (60a). Clinton is a liberal, so, the answer is combined to (60a). Therefore, (60 b) is used as an answer to the previous OQ 5. Indirectness is used in RQs intentionally by the speaker who doesn’t want to restrict the intention to one interpretation. Sometimes analysing ISAs 35
are puzzling because the same utterance may be given two interpretations. For example: "Could you pass the salt?" This example behaves linguistically both like a question and a request. Thus two speech acts in one. This type of ISA is complex. It acts like a request. On the other hand, it also behaves syntactically like a question, because if it is answered directly the answer will be fitting. So, two aspects are presented in one form (Asher and Lascarides, 2001: 183; Reese and Asher, 2007: 38). Indirectness makes speaker’s intent holds multiple interpretations. So, it leaves a space to deny the undesirable inferred meaning by the hearer (Lee, 2007:56). In other words, metaphorically, RQs can be compared to flexible elastic spring that can be used in different ways and shapes. Similarly, the speaker can change his interpretation in various ways. So, the speaker can derive what s/he wants according to the context and the hearer's reaction. 6. Indirectness aids the speaker when s/he is not completely certain of the statement. In a situation of doubt; conveying an assertion, using an RQ is more reasonable than a direct assertion. 7. Indirectness can save the speaker from responsibility. It is like passive voice; the agent disappears. In a situation of hedge, the speaker can defend herself/himself and pass the situation. This mostly occurs with a broadcast news interviewer when s/he interviews certain interviewees, especially those who are in high positions. RQs can have dual functions: as an assertion and as a question. When the speaker is challenged by the hearers, s/he can control the situation and make justification by stating that "it is just a question," i.e. modifying and representing the function of RQ as just an OQ.
36
2.8.3 Rhetorical Question and Context Cheung (2008: 125) states that RQ is "context dependent." Context is an essential factor in the interpretation of an utterance. Yule (2006: 114) distinguishes two types of context: linguistic which is known as co-text (the set of other words used with the phrase or sentence); and physical context which involves time and place. Crystal (2006: 322) demonstrates three important factors, which are crucial means to interpret and understand a communication. They are: setting (involves time and place in which communicative acts occur), Participants (associates with their relationships), and activity (relates with the kind of activity, which occurs between the participants). Cutting (2002: 3, cited in Paltridge 2006: 54) indicates some aspects of contexts. These aspects are like situational context (peoples' information about what they can see around them), background knowledge context (cultural knowledge and interpersonal knowledge, i.e. what participants know about the world, various areas of life are included, and what the participants know about each other), and co-textual context (what people know about what they have been saying). So, to comprehend the meaning of an utterance, the lexical meaning is not enough, as Thomas (1995: 22) states: Meaning is not something that is inherent in the words alone, nor is it produced by the speaker alone or the hearer alone. Making meaning is a dynamic process, involving the negotiation of meaning between speaker and hearer, the context of utterance (physical, social and linguistic), and the meaning potential of an utterance.
37
For Schaffer (2005: 444), shared background (historical or cultural) between the speaker and the hearer is needed to comprehend the content and all the implicatures of RQs. A common knowledge about the world which is part of context has influential role, as in (61a & 61b). Example (61a) is an OQ while (61b) is an RQ which acts as an answer: (61) a. Are you hungry? (OQ) b. Is Clinton a liberal? (61b) is RQ used as a response to the preceding OQ (61A). This type is called "the RQ-as-retort." The hearer infers the implicature. The obviousness of the implicature is realized through the hearer's common knowledge about the real world. In brief, Cruse (2006:35) indicates four points, which nearly include all the above points are: first, what precedes and follows utterances (co-text), second, the immediate physical situation, third, the broader situation, including social and power relations, and fourth, shared knowledge between the participants. Rohde (2006: 140-42) as well as Caponigro and Sprouse (2007: 4) point out that RQs are not limited to the negative interpretation. The answer of RQs can be positive, as long as the contexts allow. Furthermore, there are situations in which RQs can only receive a positive answer, no matter what situation is. Consider the following examples: A situation: Mina helped Luca when he was in trouble and both the speaker and the hearer are aware of that. Now Luca adores Mina for helping him. Speaker: it’s understandable that Luca adores Mina. (62)
After all, who helped him when he was in trouble? a.
Speaker/ Hearer: Mina 38
b. Speaker/ Hearer: # Nobody. (63)
Speaker: You should always help your mom if she needs your
help. After all, who gave birth to you? a.
Speaker/Hearer: My mom/ Your mom.
b.
Speaker/Hearer: #Nobody.
In (63), our common knowledge about life and existence indicates the positive answer. The significant matter is that everybody has a biological mother. It can be stated that context is an influential element for interpreting, understanding and answering a question in a right way. Its effect sometimes reaches a top that it can even change the knowable rule of RQs, which states that rhetorical positive question has the illoctionary force of a negative assertion and vice versa. Context can be elaborated to involve the whole world. Consider the following examples: (64) a. Was the Prophet Mohammed Arab? Yes, he was. b. Wasn't the Prophet Mohammed Arab? Yes, he was. In the above example, the hearer gives the same answer to the two questions which are different in orientation: (64a) is negatively oriented while (64b) is positively oriented. The reason behind giving the same answer is the hearer's world knowledge about prophet Mohammad. On the other hand, interpreting an utterance may have different meanings in different contexts. Regarding RQ, the context has the authority to distinguish RQ from OQ. Consider the following examples: in a situation: if someone who is
39
a member of an opposition party introduced the utterance in example (65) to someone who has opposite political intimacy: (65) What did the government do till now? The hearer takes example (65) as RQ and it implies that the government did not do anything. While the same example, although the same lexical elements are used, but the speaker is a foreigner like a tourist and s/he is not familiar with the addressee’s culture and background. The addressee does not take the question as an RQ instead; it is considered as an OQ. The questions in example (66) and (67) can role as OQs and RQs. The context determines their roles. For instance, the question in example (66) is mostly understood as an OQ, but in a special context it acts as an RQ. For example, when a teacher comes late to the lecture and the headmaster asks her/him the question (66). Obviously, the headmaster indirectly says that you are very late. (66) Do you know what time it is? The question in example (67) can also have dual functions: it can be an RQ and an OQ, although it is typically understood as an RQ. If it is asked in a situation referring that there is no one perfect, everyone has falsity since we are human being; therefore, it is an RQ. The answer is obvious, which is no one is perfect. Whereas when it is asked in a situation, when the speaker wants to know, for example, who completes all her/his duties without any lack, it is taken as an OQ. Hence, it can be answered as Sangeen is perfect. (67) Who is perfect?
40
2.8.4 Pragmatic Functions of Rhetorical Question RQs are ISAs because of the discrepancy between their forms and communicative functions. ISAs have both primary and secondary illocutionary acts. The primary illocutionary act is performed by secondary illocutionary act as in RQs as well. So, the primary or major functions of RQs are some functions behind the questions which are the speaker’s aims and purposes. Niazi and Gautam as it is pointed in (2.2.5) confirm this opinion that RQs are like ISAs. They state that RQs "may or may not have the illocutionary force of questioning but always bear the force of an indirect assertion." Ilie (1994: 46) states that RQs can carry out at the same time one or more functions such as a reproach (blame), a promise, a protest, and 'a self-exculpation' (a self-defence). For Koshik (2005: 3), RQs are used as accusations, complaints, disagreements and challenges. Moshavi (2009: 39) states that RQs can be used for making directive, refusing directive, issuing a criticism, and denying a criticism. Abioye (2011: 291) indicates that the purpose of RQ is to assert or deny a point implicitly. So, RQs can fulfil many functions such as pointed by Ilie(1994: 46) indicates that RQ owns multiple functions which may work distinctly in different contexts or even simultaneously , at different levels, in the same context .This belongs to the capacity of RQs to carry more than one communicative function. These are some basic multiple functions: 1. Assertion RQ as it is mentioned in (2.2.1) has the illocutionary force of an assertion of the opposite polarity from what is apparently asked. RQs can have two types of assertions: negative and positive. Consider the following examples: a) Negative Assertion. RQ is used as negative assertion, as in the following examples: 41
(68)
Did I receive help from anybody? Yet, I managed to complete my
tasks on time. (69) Can one go out upon hot coals and his feet not be burned? (Taggart, 2010: 23). Example (68) represents negative assertion that" I didn't receive help from anyone", also example (69) states negative assertion, although, the question is negative rhetorical yes-no question. b) Affirmative Assertion Chen (2011: 611) displays that a negative RQ is used as affirmative assertion. The speaker asks for affirmation of something which is already known to her/him, but s/he wants the hearer's approval about what the speaker adopts to be true. Consider the examples below: (70) In a situation where the parents are looking at their little daughter who is very sweet and lovely. The mother asks; isn’t she sweet? (71)
Haven't we had enough troubles?
In example (70), the mother affirms that "Our daughter is very sweet," and example (71), implies that "We had enough troubles." Abioye (2009:5) displays that assertive speech acts indirectly can be performed by means of RQ in order to express a standpoint/ as a way of making appoint as in: (72) Where do you think you are going?
42
2. Accusation Accusation is asserting that someone is responsible for a state of affairs that is bad (Searle and Vanderveken, 1985: 190). RQ is used for accusation, especially those questions which begin with "Didn’t you…?" "Don’t you …?" For instance: a situation in an interviewing with Clinton. When the interviewer uses "Didn’t you….?" (73) The interviewer: Well, Mister President during the last campaign didn’t you put the Vice President and all the others in your administration top side in a very vulnerable position? The interviewee (Clinton): I disagree with that. How we are vulnerable because… Example (73), Clinton's response, "I disagree with that," it is interpreted that Clinton sees the interviewer's expression 'Didn’t you…', as
affirmative
assertion for accusing , i.e. "You did," rather than as an information-seeking question. Thus, the interviewee responses with "I disagree with that." This response confirms that Clinton sees interviewer’s utterance as an accusation not as an OQ (Heritage, 2002: 1432). 3. Boast (Pride) Boasting also expresses both assertive and expressive speech acts. In the assertive sense, to express that proposition is to assert a proposition while expressing pride. In the expressive sense, to express pride is to express satisfaction for something that is related to oneself (Searle and Vanderveken, 1985: 192). For example: (74) Who could solve the problem except me? 43
4. Challenge Aristotle (1921, cited in Blankeship and Craig, 2006: 113) illustrates that the usefulness of adding RQ in a speech as an attempt to challenge the arguments of rebellious view. So, RQs are productive means in creating resistant attitudes. Koshik (2005: 21) divides challenge into two types: a) RQs as challenge to a prior turn from present party RQ is used to challenge a prior talk like example (75) is a response to a claim. In a situation: there is a heat argument between Marcia and Joseph. (75) Marcia: I don’t think I’m harming anybody. Joseph: Would you mean you weren’t harming anybody? Example (75), Joseph’s question is not heard as a request for Marcia’s response, but rather is heard as a challenge to Marcia’s claim. Joseph’s question indirectly conveys that he challenges or doesn’t believe that Marcia was not harming anyone (ibid: 39). b) RQ as challenge to a prior talk from non-present party. For instance: (76) How can she say that? The expression 'how can' is heard as a challenge. So, this interrogative form is not heard as OQ while it is heard as a challenge to prior talk from non-present party (ibid: 41). 5. Complaint RQ can be used to complain about unfair treatment. The speaker can express his/her disagreement by questioning, especially, those questions which 44
begin with both how come and why. For example, in this situation, a husband and a wife are discussing arrangements for visiting another couple. Their 4 year daughter is playing on the floor beside them. (77) The wife: Why is that we have to go there? Husband: Because she (head-motioning to daughter) can go out more easily than their kids can. In (77), the wife stresses on 'we' and 'there' to highlight expression as a complaint, It communicates that "they have to come here", the husband answers with reason which is 'she', i. e. their daughter, can go out more easily than 'their' kids. So, the husband argues against the complaint of unfairness, which is performed by the wife (Koshik, 2005: 25). 6. Command RQ can be used to make command. Making command indirectly through RQ is beneficial to avoid face threatening as in: (78) Shouldn’t you help your relation? 7. Criticism RQ is used for criticizing (refer to find fault with something or evaluate and point out the merits or demerits of a thing), for example: (79) You think it was a fight? The example implies that it is not the characterization of fighting (ibid: 23).
45
8. Denying: Deny is to say that something is not true or to refuse to admit something. RQ is used for denying something. With denial question; the speaker can demonstrate the impossibility as in: (80) How does that concern me? (Abioye, 2011: 391). (81) How could you think I did it?’ (Abioye, 2009:4). Example (80), is heard as a challenge for denying something. It implies that "it does not concern me". The speaker represents denying .While example (81), implies that "I didn’t do it." 9. Offer Offer is "a promise that is conditional on the hearer's acceptance", the speaker performs a certain sequence of action if the offer accepted by the hearer (Searle and Vanderveken, 1985: 196). (82) Wouldn't you like to be a wealthy man? Just follow this plan. 10. Persuasion RQs are used to "increase persuasion and message processing" (Howard and Kerin (1994, cited in Blankeship and Graig, 2006: 111-112). For example: (83) Wouldn't you agree that the education system could benefit from increased funding from the state?
46
11. Protest Protesting is a formal expression of disapproval. The speaker expresses her/his psychological state and it is not only sorrow, but rather disapproval. The hearer may not be directly responsible for the bad state of affairs, but s/he must be able to change it. Protesting is a request for change, for example, one protests to the authorities about some political or economic situation, it would be meaningless to protest about weather (Searle and Vaderveken, 1985: 213-14). For example: (84) Why are you so tyrant towards me? Isn't it enough? 12. Promise Promise has special features are, first, the thing promised must be something that the hearer wants to happen, secondly, promise involves a special kind of commitment, namely, an obligation(ibid: 192). (85) Would you take this as my word? Be humble and fair; you will always be remembered. 13. Reminding RQ is used to remind the hearer something in which the speaker surly has specific aims beyond this reminding such as not to be selfish, arrogant, etc. For example: (86) You must always respect your mother. After all, who fed you and gave you a proper education?
47
14. Reproach RQ is used to reproach (to criticize or blame someone's behaviour). In the following example, the speaker blames the hearer about her/his bad behaviour which involves many unacceptable manners such as selfishness, unkindness, etc. (87) Why are you so bad? 15. Sarcasm Sarcasm is a way of using words to make fun of someone by saying opposite of what you are really mean in order to show that you are annoyed. It is defined as "bitter wounding words"(West and Endicott, 1955: 269). It involves irony and satire. Consider the following example: (88) Who do you think you are? (Taggart 2010:33). 16. Suggestion Suggestion is used for both directing and asserting. Someone can suggest both that you do something and that something is the case. Suggestion differs from assertion in their degree of strength (Searle and Vandeveken, 1985: 187). RQ can be used to make suggestion, as in example (89), which implies suggestion if, both participants are of the same position and/or age. (89) Why don’t you visit him?
2.8.5 The Felicity of Rhetorical Question Rohde (2006: 145) argues that "shared knowledge about others’ beliefs and about the real world is precisely what licenses rhetorical question." Caponigro and Sprouse (2007:10) state that common ground(henceforth CG),which is defined by them as a "set of propositions representing what the 48
participants in a discourse take to be mutually believed ,or at least mutually assumed for the purpose of the discourse." They state that mutual and individual knowledge are crucial factors for participants to work and succeed RQs. In other words, it is not enough for the participants that individually everyone is aware of the proposition which occurs in communication, but also to be aware that the other participants are aware as well. Consider example (90): (90)
How high are taxes going to be when my kids are my age?
Example (90) implies that the taxes will be very high. Each participant has knowledge about the current proposition which is high tax. And each knows that the other knows. According to Rohde (2006:135) the felicity of RQ is measured by these three conditions that must be satisfied by the answers given by the speaker and the hearer. The conditions are: "a) the attending of an obvious answer, b) the sufficient similarity of the speaker and the addressee’s answers, and c) the uninformativity of the answer." On the contrary, the question rhetorically fails. As a researcher, I disagree with the last two points because it is not a must that the addressee always has the same opinion or satisfies with the same answer. On the other hand, the answer is informative even if it obvious or known because repeating a known answer is like approving/acknowledging the addresser's assertion which is in some situations is very important and required. For example, in a court, although the judge knew the answer but the criminal's acknowledgement is very important.
49
2.8.6 Answers to Rhetorical Questions Ilie (1999:997-8) states that questions can be classified in terms of response elicitation, namely: "answer-eliciting, information- eliciting, actioneliciting, and mental response-eliciting." Ilie (ibid: 981) displays that RQ is mental response- eliciting. It requires a silentacknowledgement with the speaker’s message. It induces or reinforces a type of awareness in the hearers. Estes (2013:54) states that questions with rhetorical quality correlate with the speaker’s desire to convey something as an assertion, a persuasion, or other. So, according to the two previous statements by Ilie (1999) and Estes (2013), the speaker in RQ pays more attention to what s/he wants to say or how to make more effect more than what s/he wants to hear. Searle et al. (1980:98) indicate two types of RQs: One is treated as ISA and the other type is genuine RQ. The latter type is like a monologue when someone asks her/himself. In general, RQs do not require an answer (verbal and nonverbal as well), in case they are uttered in soliloquy or because the answer is known completely or given by the speaker her/himself. Consider the following example where the speaker gives the answer. (91) Who likes you more than everyone else? Off course your mother. In terms of answering, both types (ISA and genuine) do not expect answers, but answers are possible. The difference between them is that the former one can be answered both by the speaker and the addressee while the latter type which is genuine RQ, can be answered only by the speaker if it is answered.
50
Quirk et al. (1985: 826) name genuine RQ as "ractionative question." It is selfaddressed. Consider the examples below: (92) Am I that stupid? Example (92) is rhetorical if it is uttered as monologue. Also, it can be rhetorical when it is used as an answer to a prior turn as a challenge and expressing protest. Rohde (2006:135) states that an RQ may be responded in certain cases: "if the rhetorical intent was misunderstood, the question was an exam-question, or the response confirms or acknowledges the implication of the rhetorical question." Consider example (93) which takes two answers by the addressees. (93) Who would steal a newspaper? a.
No one. (Rhetorically worked)
b. Actually, I once stole a newspaper to read on the train. (Rhetorically failed) In example (93), the felicity of the question depends on the shared sense between the participants. The shared sense is the price of a newspaper which associates with the act of stealing. The question implies a negative answer, i. e. (a) no one steals a newspaper and this answer is very high probability. The very low probability is (b) answer, which also includes the answer set. Rohde believes that when the addressee answers as (b), it means that the addressee doesn’t understand the speaker’s intention. So, misunderstanding occurs between them. This makes the question fail rhetorically (ibid: 162). It is worth noting that partial disagreement may be faced Rohde's viewpoint who believes that shared knowledge between the participants lead to sufficient similar answer. The shard knowledge does not necessarily always lead to 51
sufficiently similar answer. Rather, the shared knowledge will help the addressee to understand the speaker’s utterance. However, it is not necessary for the addressee to have the same opinion or belief as the speaker adopts as it is exemplified in (b) answer. Rohde (2006: 135) states that RQs have a wide range of answers which are: 1. Negative answer as in:
(94)
Who lifted a finger to help?
2. Positive answer like: (95) Fancy meeting you here. It's a small world, isn't it? 3. Non-null answer, for example: (96) Who always shows up late to class? 4. Multiple answers such as:
(97) What's going to happen to these kids when they grow up?
Schaffer (2005:44) illustrates that the answer of RQs may "self-evident", consider the below example: (98) Who brought you into this world, anyway? Your mother.
52
2.9 Summary It is possible for one indirect utterance to have more than one illocutionary force. This perspective can be used in another way to prove that RQs may have a dual function as an assertion and a question as well. It must be kept in mind that the most prominent function is not a question, but at the same time it often may function as a question when a questioner lacks the amount of information even it is a very little. ISAs have both primary and secondary illocutionary acts. As for RQs, they can have both primary and secondary illocutionary forces. The primary illocutionary can be represented as an assertion and the secondary one can be an illocutionary force of questioning. So RQs can be described mainly as one to one and often as one to two .The following example represents two forces: (99) Why are you so hard? Example (99) can perform two illocutionary forces, the first primary one is asserting in which the speaker attacks the hearer and blames her/him. It means you are very crude and unkind one. The secondary illocutionary force is questioning in which a speaker asks a hearer about the reason behind of his/her hardness. If the hearer answers and says that I want to revenge, it is very normal and acceptable.
53
Chapter Three Metaphysical Poetry in Seventeenth Century 3.1 An Overview of Metaphysical Poetry Metaphysics is the part of philosophy that is concerned with trying to understand and describe the nature of truth, life and reality. The name of 'metaphysical poets' is given to "a divorce group of 17th century English poets whose work is notable for its ingenious of intellectual and theological concepts in surprising conceits, strange paradoxes, and far-fetched imagery" ( Baldick, 2001:153). Ousby (1996: 257) and Mikics (2007: 182) state that, firstly, John Dryden, coined the term 'metaphysical poetry' when he criticised Donne of his style. Later, Samuel Johnson adopted Dryden's opinion in his 'Life of Cowley' where he named Donne and his followers as 'Metaphysical Poets'. Mallet (1983: 91) mentions that according to Dryden's perspective, Donne "affects the metaphysics, not only in his satires, but in his amorous verses, where nature only should reign". In other words, Dryden accuses and disagrees with Donne's affecting the metaphysics. Dryden criticizes the form that the language of philosophical is used in excessive manner even in his love poetry and it is seemed inappropriate by Dryden. Samuel Johnson extends Dryden's perspective in his "Life of Cowley", and recognizes Donne as a master and founder of a school, but without using sympathy. Metaphysical poets' weakness is that they leave away the major task of the poet, which is to represent either emotional state of human or natural world in a way drawing the reader's feelings. Instead, they try only to show off 54
their learning and intellectual ingenuity (Mallet, 1983: 91; Smith and Philips, 1996: 4). Alden (1920: 184) displays that to Johnson, the metaphysical poets' thoughts are "often new but seldom natural; they are not obvious." So, it can be interpreted that the term metaphysical is largely used in negative sense by both John Dryden and Samuel Johnson.
John Bennett observes that the term
'metaphysical' actually refers to the style rather than subject matter (Sarker, 2012: 447). Whereas, Jim Hunter believes that metaphysical means: "concerned with the fundamental problems of the nature of the universe, and man's place in life." In this sense the poetry of Donne and his followers may be called metaphysical because metaphysical and religious concerns do appear in it. For example, Vaughn's poem "The World" is metaphysical in its subject -matter when he says "I saw Eternity the other night" (Lall, 2010: 9).It can be concluded that both opinions are reasonable because metaphysical poetry includes both. Metaphysical poets were neglected until the early of twentieth century Herbert Grierson and T.S. Eliot brought the poetry of Donne and his contemporaries back into favour. Eliot acknowledges and admires their style of combining intellection and emotion. Eliot's essay "The Metaphysical Poets" in (1921) plays a crucial role in paying attention to metaphysical poets' style and integrating them as central object for literary study. Consequently, Donne is adopted in the 1940s and 1950s by new critics like Cleanth Brooks and Robert Penn Warren, who recommend Eliot for using in the teaching of poetry (Mikics, 2007: 183). Eliot (1993, cited in Wanbe and Mangang , 2013: 2401- 02) illustrates that in the 20th interesting arouses towards the metaphysical poetry. He refers the
55
reason to a belief that our mentality and feelings are better expressed by the 17th century than by the 18th century or 19th.
3.2 Rhetorical Question in Metaphysical Poetry As a traditional age, the 16th and 17th centuries were marked by "social disorder and religious breakdown." The general mood of doubt created by the Reformation (the 16 th century religious movement that led to the establishment of the Protestant churches) that encouraged scientific exploration and analysis, and this led to questions about man's place in the existence. The poetry of this period is marked by need to question (Thorne, 2006: 144). RQs are one of the devices that people from different classes used as a way to express their viewpoints about things around them. Crystal (2003: 218) points that "public speakers, politicians, poets, and all who give monologues quite often used rhetorical questions as a means of making a dramatic point." Metaphysical poets prefer to use words and ideas that "call the mind into play"(Bennett, 1953: 8). Accordingly, it is clear that metaphysical poets attempt to make the hearer/the reader think. The reader/hearer involves to the metaphysical poetry that is invited to participate the experience of the poets and follows the poets' problems by using RQs with which the speaker (poet) asks and provides the answer at the same time. Also, teaching is one of the metaphysical poetry's characteristics; questioning and answering are a good way for teaching. For example, George Herbert's poems are catechistical with which Christianity is taught by questioning and answering (Fish, 1978: 25-6).
3.3 Characteristics of Metaphysical Poetry Below are the main characteristics that distinguish the works of metaphysical poets: 56
3.3.1 Conceit Originally, conceit means a concept or image. There are often two types of conceit: Petrarchan and the Metaphysical Conceit (Abrams, 2009: 53). a. The Petrarchan Conceit Abrams (ibid) displays that Petrarchan conceit is a type of figure used in love poems. Firstly, it was used by Italian poets. Later it was imitated by others. Shakespeare employs this type of conceit, as in: "My mistress' eyes are nothing like the sun" b. The Metaphysical Conceit Metaphysical conceit is a prominent feature in the works John Donne and other metaphysical poets of the 17th century. For Baldick (2001: 47-8), conceit is an elaborate metaphor or simile denoting a surprisingly intelligent likeness between two heterogeneous (dissimilar) things. Helen Gardener defines it as "a comparison whose ingenuity is more striking than its justness, or, at least, is more immediately striking" (Keast, 1962: 54). Gardener indicates criteria for a comparison to be a conceit: "a comparison becomes a conceit when we are made to concede likeness while being strongly conscious of unlikeness." For Gardener, a brief comparison can be a conceit if the two things are obviously unlike, and we never think of them together because feeling of incongruity. It is an immediate point of resemblance which is adopted by a poet. It likens to a spark which is made by striking two stones together. After the spark; the stones are just two stones. Metaphysical conceit is an extended conceit in which the poet invents a new point of likeness and by which difficult join is made .The 57
main point of metaphysical conceit is that it aims to convince the hearer/reader of the comparison and its justness by its ingenuity and analytical way to prove the analogy (Keast, 1962: 56). So, it can be concluded that it deviates the conventional way of resemblance. Samuel Johnson (1779, cited in Abrams, 2009: 53) describes metaphysical conceit as "a combination of dissimilar images, or discovery of occult resemblances in things apparently unlike .The most heterogeneous ideas are yoked by violence together." The last three stanzas of Donne's poem: "A Valediction: Forbidding Mourning" is an example of the metaphysical conceit. The poem carries a comparison between two lovers and the two legs of a compass. If they be two, they are two so A stiffe twin compasses are two, They soule the fixt foot, makes no show To move, but doth, if th' other doe. And though it in the center sit, Yet when the other far doth rome, It leanes, and hearkens after it, And growes erect, as that comes home. Such wilt thou be to mee, who must Like th' other foot, obliquely runne; Thy firmness drawes my circle just, And makes me end, where I begunne. Through drawing a complete circle, Donne analyses the relation and persuades his mistress not to mourn. 58
3.3.2 Dramatic Quality Mallett (1983: 93) illustrates that metaphysical poems contain some qualities of drama such as: dramatic monologue, dialogue, colloquial style, etc. a) Dramatic Monologue Osbey (1996: 119) describes it as a poem that includes a single character who conveys his/her thoughts, character, situation, and psychological state. The poet addresses a silent audience or conflicts with his/herself. For example, George Herbert's poem 'The Collar' contains a monologue. b) Dialogue Metaphysical poems also include dialogue. An example is Donne's "The Sun Rising" which begins with direct and dramatic address to the sun as personified. Busie old foole, unruly Sunne, Why dost though thus, Through windows ,and through curtaines all on us? Must to thy motions lovers seasons run? c) Colloquial Style Mallett (1983: 93) mentions that metaphysical poems contain colloquial speech. For example, the opening lines of various poems contain some expressions such as "For Godsake hold your tongue , and let me love" of the poem 'The Canonization.'
59
d) Abruptness Sometimes there is abruptness at the opening lines of the poems without any prediction or background. Examples can be found in the beginning lines of the poems "The Canonization" and "The Sun Rising", as it is pointed in the previous point. The poem "The Flea" begins abruptly as well when the speaker wants to draw his lover's attention toward the flea (Laffir, 2005: 3). Marke but this flea, and marke in this, How little that which thou deny'st me is; 3.3.3 Association of Sensibility One of the most remarkable characteristics of metaphysical poets is associating the two significant aspects which are thoughts and feelings. Eliot (1921) coined the phrase "dissociation of sensibility" in his essay "The Metaphysical Poets". He states that Donne and his followers possess a mechanism that they do not separate intellection from emotion. In other words, they fuse reason with passion. He displays that most poet's work after 17th century; either intellectual or emotional and these two features do not associate with each other as an act of unified sensibility. So, both are treated unbalanced and Eliot diagnoses this dissociation as a weakness of English poetry .Whereas in 17th century with metaphysical poetry; thought and feeling are associated as a unified sensibility. For them thought is" immediate as the odour of a rose" (Mikics, 2007: 91-2; Abrams, 2009: 82-3). A thought to Donne is an experience that modifies and decorates his emotions (Cuddon, 2013: 209). 3.3.4 Language and Theme Metaphysical poems are "simple, artificial, difficult, or fantastic" (Keast, 1962: 28). In general, the theme of metaphysical poetry is about love and 60
religion. The tense of the sentences are simple and brief, but many archaic words are used e.g. saies, reades, teares, subtile, etc. They are artificial because the analogies are so strange and unconventional. 3.3.5 Wit Wit covers many meanings such as: reasoning power (intelligence), mental capability (ingenuity), the ability to relate dissimilar things so as to illuminate or amuse (Merriam Webster, 2015). Eliot expresses his admiration of metaphysical poets' use of wit and defines it as "knowledgeable technical skill united with a lot of self – consciousness," (Childs and Fowler, 2006: 252).Wit in the 16th and 17th centuries was used for ingenuity in literary invention. Its most common use derives from its 17th century application to brilliant and paradoxical style (Abrams, 2009: 380). Abraham Cawley has a poem entitled "Ode of Wit", who explains the complexity of wit and its various shapes. He likens wit to a soul; we don't know how it is, but we feel it Tell me, O tell, what kind of thing is wit Thou who master art of it A thousand different shapes it bears, Comely in thousand shapes appears … Like spirits in a place, we know not how 3.3.6 Originality The traditional topics of life in a stimulating way are treated by the metaphysical poets (Thorne, 2006: 144). Intellectual, logical argument and analytic way are used. These techniques, analytic in particular, are original.
61
3.3.7 Paradox Paradox is a "statement which seems on its face to be logically contradictory or absurd, yet turns out to be interpretable in a way that makes sense." If the paradoxical utterance combines two words are apparently contradictory in ordinary, it is called an oxymoron. Paradox is used as an essential device in 17th century metaphysical poetry (Abrams, 2009: 239). Paradox is a frequent device, for example, Herbert's poem "Affliction" ends with a paradox (Lall, 2010: 10). Ah, my dear God! Though I am clean forgot, Let me not love thee, if I love thee not. 3.3.8 Analytical style Analytical style is a characteristic of metaphysical poetry (Martin, 1971: 9). An analytical way means using a logical method of presenting and analysing a proposition to persuade the hearer/reader. RQs are also used to forward the view point in a systematic procedure. For example, the poem "The Collar" in which the poet poses many examples in form of RQs just to analyse and prove that how priests suffer in the church.
3.4 The Major Metaphysical Poets Eliot (19 93, in cited Wanbe and Mangang, 2013: 2400) demonstrates that it is not easy to give a comprehensive definition of metaphysical poetry as well as to determine the exact number of the poets who adopt and practice it to belong to this school of poetry. So, there are various opinions about the exact number and names of metaphysical poets. 62
Metaphysical poets are a group of poets from early decades of the seventeenth century, including John Donne, George Herbert, Abraham Cowley, Henry Vaughan, Andrew Marvell, Thomas Carew, and Richard Crashaw (Mikics, 2007: 182). John Donne is described as the leader of metaphysical poets (Baldick, 2001: 153). According to Thorne (2006:144) the term ‘metaphysical’ is only used to label poets like John Donne, George Herbert, Thomas Carew, Henry Vaughan and Andrew Marvell.
3.5 Summary Metaphysical poetry has some characteristics, which are valuable. First, it covers the most prominent and essential topics in real life like religion and love. Religion is concerned and its relations such as: struggle with human's desire to remain consistent in their worship and avoid things that destroy their spiritual life. God's love and prayer are two important elements which always human being, at the end of life in particular, turns to. Love is concerned in its various types and its correlations. For instance, it involves spiritual, sexual love and its relations like sorrow, canonization, etc. Actually, these cases represent the reality of life. Second, it aims at teaching the human being certain issues through poems. In other words, it is didactic type. It deals with some things which were modern at that time. Third, it is written in unconventional style to challenge the hearer's expectation. This deviation is sometimes very important to stimulate invention and lead to modernism. Otherwise, life will be just a type of imitation, and this step by step will delimit or decrease human's thinking and imagination. Consequently, these characteristics are attractive factors by which metaphysical poetry is preferred to work on it for adapting RQs.
63
Chapter Four Analysis of the Selected Poems 4.1 Analysis of the Poems The analysis is built on an eclectic model stated in (1.6). The results of the analysis are documented in tables in which types of RQs (Yes-No/WH/verbless), types of NPIs (WNPI/SNPI), orientation (positively/negatively/non biased), and functions are illustrated.
4.2 Analysis of John Donne's Poems 4.2.1 "Break of Day" The speaker is a woman who addresses her beloved .The woman's reply is a protest against her beloved's leaving. The theme of the poem is love (Pishkar, 2010: 245). This poem includes three stanzas each consisting of six lines. The poem presents two lovers in bed. The man just gestured "its day," and it implies that he intended to get up and leave his beloved. The speaker who is the woman suggests two reasons, which lead to his leaving. They may be light; because he fears to discover their hidden relationship or because he has business, he has to attend to as usual. The speaker expresses her complaint against "the busied man" not the "busied person". The title of the poem does not only mean day but also gestures separation "break" between two lovers (ibid). Brackett (2008: 40) points out that Donne represents the female point of view. The speaker rejects day because it has gained departure symbol. She also, wants to clarify that devoting only night for love and passion is just "artificially limited." Donne uses darkness and light which relate with the traditional 64
activities like sleeping and working
or with two opposites as evil relates with
darkness and good with light. Pishkar (2010:246) states that the woman believes that love is at the top of all values. The man's business causes to reduce their love. As a result, she is jealous of it. Below are the RQs used in the poem: 'Tis true, 'tis day what though it be? O wilt thou therefore rise from me? Why should we rise? because 'its light? Did we lie down, because 'twas night?
(Lines 1-4)
... Must business thee from hence remove?
(Line 13)
The first question is " 'Tis true, 'tis day what though it be?"
(Line1).
Semantically, this wh-question can be interpreted according to Este's definition (as dual function) which is pointes in section (2.2.5). So, it can be interpreted as having a dual function: rhetorical and informational quality it does not have a specific bias (positive or negative). Pragmatically, it has the illocutionary force of urging. It induces the speaker herself to think. Furthermore, the question is used as a proposal for a common starting point to open discussion. The second RQ is "O wilt thou therefore rise from me?" (Line 2) Semantically speaking, this positive yes-no question bears positive assertion. It does not represent its contrary polarity. It means: he will rise from her. In other words, the man wants to depart his lover because it is day. Pragmatically speaking, this RQ has the illocutionary force of reminding. 65
Through this RQ, the speaker (woman) reminds her lover that she knows that he wants to leave her and she will again suffer from loneliness because day is given a departing characteristic by the man. This RQ is used as an answer to the previous question. So, by its turn makes the preceding question require more rhetorical quality because the woman herself provides the answer to the question. The third question is "Why should we rise? because 'its light?" (Line 3) This RQ consists of two parts; in the first part she asks while in the second part, she gives the answer. It is one characteristic of RQ in which some time the speaker her/himself gives the answer precisely. The second part of the RQ does not begin with a capital letter just to show the reader it is one question. Semantically, this RQ is understood as a negative assertion, i.e. we should not rise although, it is day. Pragmatically, this RQ carries the illocutionary force of rejecting command and showing her protest towards her lover's opinion who believes just night is a symbol for collecting two lovers whereas day is a symbol for other things like business or any other activity. Through the previous RQ (line 2), it is clearly obvious that when day comes, they will leave each other. This behaviour becomes usual. So, day (light) is treated as having authority to oblige them to leave each other. That is why the phrase 'why should' is used by the woman. The fourth RQ is "Did we lie down, because 'twas night?" (Line 4) From semantic perspective, this RQ is understood as a negative assertion. In other words, there is another important factor induces them for lying which is love. So, the woman's view is that their lying is related with love not night. From pragmatic perspective, this RQ communicates the illocutionary force of expressing her standpoint which is negative assertion. Simultaneously, it reveals reproach speech act. The speaker reproaches her lover about his wrong 66
view where their lying and love is restricted just to a specific time which is night. This view annoys the woman and she feels spiritually so tired. The last RQ is "Must business thee from hence remove?" (Line 13) Semantically speaking, this RQ equals to positive assertion. It means he must remove from his business hereafter. It seems that the woman is annoyed from her lover's business because it kidnaps all his time. Consequently, the man takes away from her. So, it is clear that this question is not an informational seeking question but rather she expresses her standpoint which is leaving or at least lessens the amount of devoted hours for business but in question form. Pragmatically speaking, this RQ carries the illocutionary force of command. The speaker and the addressee are two lovers so it is not welcomed if one of them makes command upon the other, but due to the woman's bother and feeling of loneliness, she reaches a point to make a command that he must take away from his business otherwise they will depart from each other. So, business is the influential factor to separate two lovers. Furthermore, the poet recognizes it as the worst disease of love. Women can endure poor, ugly, dirty, and false man but they cannot stand busy man. So, business man and woman's love have unsystematic relation they cannot go parallel with each other. The philosophical ideas beyond the poem are: feeling of loneliness and lacking love feeling are the most influential factor for separating two lovers. The most important thing to women in general is that they always want their lovers or husbands to carry their flirtations. Also, women are always wanted to put at the top of all things in front of their beloved. So, they would be jealous of everything which causes to decrease carrying their flirtations by their lovers/husbands even if the separating cause is their lover's business which is the source of their living. Women are necessary to be paid attention and they will interest with it otherwise 67
what their lovers do for sake of them; they will not appreciate them if they lack feeling of love. It can be asked why the woman did not assert her standpoint directly? There are reasons beyond preferring RQs instead of direct way which are: she did not want to impose the man, she wanted to criticize and command softly without argument, and the most important reason is that the entire subject was sensitive. The above discussion of RQs in Donne's "Break of Day" can be summarized in the following table:
68
O wilt thou therefore
2
Why should we rise?
Did we lie down,
3
Must business thee from hence remove?
Total
of ISAs
RQ in terms
_
Urging
Yes- No
Positively
_
_
Reminding
Wh-
_
_
Rejecting,
Negatively biased
command,
and Protesting
Question
4
Yes- No
Negatively
_
_
biased
because 'twas night?
5.
_
Question
because 'its light?
4.
SNPI
biased
rise from me? 3.
WNPI
Question
what though it be?
2.
Functions of
Not bias
NPIs
Wh-
of
Orientation
1
Types
Types of RQs
'Tis true, 'tis day
Line No.
1.
RQs
Series of No
Table (1) RQs used in Donne's "Break of Day"
Negative assertion and reproach
Question
13
Yes-No
Positively
Question
biased
3Yes–No Questions
1 No bias 2 Negative
and
_
_
Command
0WNPI
0SNPI
1Command, 1Negative 1Protesting,
assertion,
biased 2WhQuestion
1Reminding, 2 Positively biased
1Rejecting, 1Reproach, and 1Urging,
69
4.2.2 "The Canonization" The poem is a dialogue, but represents one side of an argument (Lawrence et al., 1985: 231). The speaker represents his disagreement towards the prior turn who criticizes him and his lover. Laffir (2005: 1) states that the subject of the poem is about mutual love. The poem is "Donne's natural and genuine work" (Bloom, 2008: 115). It consists of five nine- line stanzas. In the first stanza, the speaker seems to be in a bad mood and impatient. Consequently, the opening line occurs in colloquial English. The speaker protests and disagrees with the addressee who criticizes, and causes their love to fail. Laffir (2005: 8) illustrates that the poem begins with a defensive speaker who says, "For God sake hold your tongue and let me love". The speaker talks to a person and defends their love; he does not want the addressee to 'undermine' or 'mock' it. The speaker is impatient because he does not want his thought of love to be damaged. He says that the addressee can mock and criticize what he wants like his bad fortune, his poor health and his grey hair, but not his love. In the second stanza, the speaker continues his effort to make the addressee realize that his love does not harm anyone or change anything in a negative way. He composes some RQs to defend his love and persuade the addressee of his innocent love. The RQs begin with (lines10- 15). The questions and examples serve as proofs of the speaker's claim that his love has not injured anyone (ibid: 9-10). In the third stanza, the addressee apparently compares the lovers to flies, who live only for a short time, or to candles (tapers) which are consumed by fire. The lovers die by the heat of their passion as well. The speaker confirms these comparisons but adds some additional comment and comparisons. The speaker 70
approves that the lovers may consume themselves like candles, but they will rise from their own' ashes' (Lawrence et al. 1985: 232). Laffir (2005: 11) exhibits that the speaker shows that their love is warm and brings forward light and life. The speaker knows that the flames will eventually cause and mark their death. However, he believes that their love will neither be lost nor forgotten. Their innocent love will be 'canonized'. The speaker likens himself and his lover to eagle and dove, which represent courage and peace. The varying quality of these birds represents how the lovers balance each other. Also, the speaker resembles themselves to The Phoenix that consumes itself by fire; the lovers consume themselves in passion as well. Mallet (1983: 34) mentions that The Phoenix was a mythical bird. It was believed to consume itself 'periodically' in fire and to rise renewed but unchanged from its own ashes. In the last two stanzas, the speaker describes how they will be remembered and canonized by others. The speaker says that the lovers "can die by love if not live by it." The speaker indicates that even if the lovers unfit to be the lovers' legend, they will be fit for poetry. Eventually, they will be memorized. Then in the last stanza, the speaker again has confidence that people will invoke the lovers as the saints of love and people will try to imitate the lovers (Laffir, 2005: 13-14). The speaker is described as one who teaches love as peace rather than anger (Lawrence e.t al., 1985: 232-3). Lawrence et al. (ibid) and Laffir (2005: 2) demonstrate that in the second stanza the speaker defends on himself. In this stanza, the speaker composes a series of RQs to response someone who criticizes and refuses the speaker and his lover's love (Martin, 1971: 24). By these RQs and examples the speaker wants to respond and illustrate his disagreement to a prior turn. The addressee seems to have authority that is why the speaker uses RQs instead of direct assertion. Being influential strategy of persuasion, the speaker uses these RQs to persuade the 71
addressee softly. Consequently, the speaker can claim and state that "so we love each other" as a result. Below are the RQs used in the second stanza: Alas, alas, who's injured by my love? What merchants ships have my sighs drown'd? Who saies my teares have overflow'd his ground? When did my colds a forward spring remove? When did the heats which my veines fill Adde one more to the plaguie Bill?
(Lines 10-15)
The first RQ is "Alas, alas, who's injured by my love?" (Line10). It begins with alas, which is used to express unhappiness. Semantically, this positive RQ is not seeking information, but it is equivalent to a negative assertion, i.e. no one is injured by his love. The speaker uses the word' alas' to emphasize and represent his deploration
towards the addressee's disagreement
about their love. Pragmatically, the speaker expresses his standpoint implicitly. This RQ has the illocutionary force of protest. The speaker challenges the addressee's opinion. Concurrently; it has the illocutionary force of denying. The speaker denies the addressee's fault view, who believes that their love is not innocent and it does not last long. The second RQ is "What merchants ships have my sighs drown'd?"(Line11) Semantically, this rhetorical wh-question conveys a negative assertion. So, it holds its contradictory polarity. It carries the implicit message that his sighs 72
have not drowned any merchants' ships. In other words, he wants to say that his love affair has been totally free of any harm done to the commercial and traders' ships. Pragmatically, it has the illocutionary forces of self-defence and persuading. The speaker challenges the addressee's opinion and defends his love by asserting that he has not drowned any merchants' ships. The intention behind bringing this example in form of RQ is to persuade the addressee about his harmless love. The third RQ is "Who saies my teares have overflow'd his ground?" (Line12) The updated spelling of these two archaic words 'saies' and 'teares' are says and tears. Semantically, this positive RQ communicates negative assertion. It means no one says his tears have overflowed his ground. In other words, his tears have not overflowed anyone's ground. Pragmatically, this RQ concurrently bears the illocutionary force of self-defence and persuading as well. The aim beyond bringing this RQ; is again to prove that the speaker's love is honest and he does not intend to harm any entity. So, this RQ works as a proof to perform self -defence. His tears which are symbols of love do not harm even inanimate things like the ground. Thus, it is impossible to harm human beings The fourth RQ is "When did my colds a forward spring remove?" (Line13) From the semantic perspective, this positive RQ renders negative assertion: his colds never did a forward spring remove, i.e. his colds never cause to delay coming spring. According to Laffir (2005:10) the speaker connects his poor health to spring and shows that his poor health has not postponed the beginning of spring. From pragmatic perspective, the speech act of self-defence and persuading are implicitly performed by stating that he does not even harm the nature (for instance, he does not cause to delay the beginning of spring). Thus, this RQ also holds another evidence of self-defence to persuade the 73
addressee that he does not change anything negatively. The purpose of behind bringing this example within this RQ is again to convince the addressee to change her/his opinion towards the speaker's love which is innocent and everlasting. The fifth RQ is "When did the heats which my veines fill Adde one more to the plaguie Bill?" (Lines 14-15) This line includes three archaic words veines, adde, and plaguie, here are their modernized spellings veins, add, and plague. In terms of semantic perspective, this RQ equals negative assertion: it means his heats did not add any more to the plague Bill. Mallet (1983: 34) explains the 'plaguie Bill' as a weekly list which includes the name of people who died due to the plague in London. Laffir (2005:10) interprets this RQ as he says that "his heats have not increased the spread of the epidemic." So, he does not harm human being's health. From pragmatic view, this RQ presents resistance and the speaker brings another evidence to offer self-defence which in its turn leads to persuasion. So, the speaker, by all these examples in form of RQs, can strengthen his assertion and deny the addressee's criticism, but softly. The aim of composing all these RQs just to persuade the addressee about his everlasting and innocent love, and they really love each other. "Though she and I do love," (see appendix No.1"B" line 18). This proposition can be drowned out behind using this series of RQs; the speaker composes the RQs logically by examples which are used as a means for persuasion. The speaker brings some examples, which may directly or indirectly relate with human life. The speaker states that if he does not harm commerce, ground, and nature which are inanimate things. This leads to this result that he
74
surely does not harm animate ones particularly his beloved. So, he does not harm anyone's profits or property. It can be asked, why the speaker does not assert these statements directly? This may be due to these reasons: first, social status and authority of the addressee over the speaker .Second, the speaker poses a series of RQs; by each he indirectly communicates that his love is innocent; in situation like this, indirect way is very suitable
way otherwise by using direct way will be
repetition and redundancy. Third, is the nature of literature register; its language is different from ordinary speech which is directly and sometimes rough; the important point is that he says what he wants but softly. The above discussion of RQs in Donne's "The Canonization" can be summarized in the following table:
75
Alas,
alas,
injured by
who's
10
my love?
Wh-
Negatively
Question
biased
Wh-
Negatively
WNPI
SNPI
_
_
terms of ISAs
Functions of RQ in
NPIs
Types of
Orientation
Types of RQ
Line No.
RQs
Series of N0.
Table (2) RQs used in Donne's "The Canonization"
Protest
and
denying
1.
What merchants ships have 2.
my
11
sighs
_
_
Question
Self- defence and
Biased
drown'd?
persuading
Who saies my teares 3.
have
12
Wh-
Negatively
Question
biased
_
_
and
overflow'd
his ground?
persuading
When did my colds a forward 4.
Self- defence
13
spring
Wh-
Negatively
Question
biased
_
_
Self- defence and
remove? persuading
5.
When did the heats which my veines fill Adde
one
14-15
Wh-
Negatively
Question
biased
_
_
Self-defence and
more to
persuading
the plaguie Bill? Total
5Wh-
5Negatively
0WNP
0SNPI
1Deny
Questions biased
1Protest 4Self-defences 4Persuading
76
4.2.3 "The Good- Morrow" The poem is a monologue. It deals with past, present and future time. Past love is treated as childish, the present love as awaking souls, and the future love as eternal love. So, Love is the theme of the poem (Martin, 1971: 36).This poem is extremely personal and confidential, it reflects the poet's life like a "stamp on it"(Smith and Philips, 1996: 67). John Donne’s "The Good-Morrow" consists of three stanzas each signifies a particular stage in the growth of love between two lovers. Through the poem, three types or periods of love occur between lovers in a logical way. The types begin from immature to mature love. This mature love grows and produces eternal love. In the first stanza, Donne uses RQs to express the experience of
his
immature love. He states "What thou and I Did, till we loved? were we not wean'd till then? But suck'd on countrey pleasures, childishly? Or snorted we in the Seaven Sleepers den?" These suggest that the love they had was childish. Also, their relationship was nothing more than fear, jealousy and dream. So, it was never true love. In the second and third stanzas, Donne expresses the change and transition from immature to true love. Donne, states "And now good-morrow to our waking souls" So, Donne likens mature love as waking from dream and begins a new life as a day starts from morning. Thus, he uses "good-morrow" (represents literal good morning). Martin (1971: 36) indicates that the second stanza deals about waking souls, which is the beginning of love of two lovers and it is like' birth.' Love controls all the lovers' parts. So, they don’t need to be jealous of one another. Each of them has a world and both have a share world. Reciprocal love, both spiritual and physical, makes them one. The third stanza 77
deals with lovers' oneness as a mirror image; one face reflects in the other's eyes. They will be the two better hemispheres. In the third stanza, there is again a transition in the poet’s view on love. He concludes that mature love transfers and produces eternal love and he is sure that their love is everlasting and will continue to the future by their generation. Below is a list of RQs in the poem in which the poet asks: "What thou, and I Did, till we lov'd? were we not wean'd till then? But suck'd on countrey pleasures, childishly? Or snorted we in the seaven sleepers den?"
(Lines 1- 4)
… "Where can we finde two better hemispheres Without sharpe North, without declining West?" (Lines 17-18)
The first RQ is "What thou, and I Did till we lov'd?" (Lines 1-2) Semantically, this positive wh- question is like a negative assertion. It means they did nothing till they loved (love belongs to real love that can endure and continue in spite of all the difficulties that face life). After their experience with real love (mature love), they felt that what they did was not real love. Pragmatically, this RQ has the illocutionary force of a negative assertion. Donne implicitly wants to express that there was a type of desire and relation, but it was not real love because it did not relate with the lovers' souls, rather it might relate with other things which are just appearance and temporary like beauty, richness, and position (authority). When human beings satisfy these things, they will be 78
just routines .Or they may themselves be removed and destroyed, for example a rich man may bankrupt by loss or a man in a high position may be losing his authority by dismissing.
Their love was immature because their souls did not
bind with each other, so they did not feel relax. To prove his perspective, Donne asks some other questions which, are in fact, not real questions, but are some attributions of lovers who engage with immature love. The second RQ is "Were we not wean'd till then?" (Line 2) Semantically, this rhetorical negative yes-no question signifies reversed polarity of what is said, it means they were weaned, i.e. they were not such infants like a baby. Their childish behaviour is a result of their choosing and understanding of love was wrong. Pragmatically, Donne wants to make sarcasm about their behaviour in the sense that they treated life like a child. Even Donne is in doubt, were they weaned or not? As pointed in chapter two; one characteristic of RQ is that the speaker him/herself provides the answer. The answers can be seen in (lines 3-4), but in question forms. The third RQ is "But suck'd on countrey pleasures, childishly?" (Line 3) The modernized spelling of word 'countrey' is country. Semantically, this RQ is like a positive assertion. It means they sucked on country pleasures childishly, i.e. they were not so little, but they just thought for pleasures, without thinking how they get it and by what means. Pragmatically, it simultaneously has the illocutionary force of both affirmative assertion and reproach in which the poet expresses his attitudes toward the case of lovers at that period (immature love) negatively. Their love was mere fancy in the sense that they outstrip reality. Since, they behave childishly. Nutt (1999: 48) displays that the poet describes the idea of their previous experiences as childish by calling them "countrey pleasures". Childishness is used as a central metaphor in the first 79
stanza. The notion is that whatever has taken place with this childish love is only "fragmentary, unfulfilled enjoyment." The fourth RQ is "Or snorted we in the seaven sleepers den?" (Line 4) Modernized spelling of word 'seaven' is seven. Semantically, this rhetorical yes- no question is like positive assertion. It means they snorted in the seven sleepers den, i.e. they were unconscious like the seven sleepers in the cave. Mallet (1983: 30) explains "seaven sleepers den" as the cave in which seven young Christians escaped from Roman harassment. They slept and they woke up after centuries. They found that Christianity was the officially accepted religion. Donne points to a religious story. As a researcher, this characteristic can be counted as one of the positive characteristics of metaphysical poetry. Pragmatically, this RQ is used as a vehicle to represent sarcasm and reproach speech acts implicitly. The researcher believes that; the word 'snorted' with seven sleepers; is positively remark because it causes to protect them while with two lovers; is negatively remark because it does not protect them but rather it causes to fall them in some problems. Donne reproaches the lovers' behaviour because they behave as unconscious ones. Donne does not ask to get answers; rather he wants indirectly through these RQs, to assert that there is a period of love, immature love which is full of doubt, fear, dreams, and unconsciousness. He indirectly expresses his point of view about this type of love and gives some of its characteristics In the second and third stanzas, Donne shifts to mature love. He uses 'good morrow' in its literal meaning because good morning signifies the beginning of a new day. Similarly, this mature love is like falling into a new life. Bennett (1953: 25) states that Donne believes that with mature love; there is no need for jealousy, and no longer inconsistent senses. For Donne, this experience 80
is like awaking from a nightmare (Bennett, 1953:25). The lovers who own mature love feel happy and relax because love controls all their life (Nutt, 1999: 49).As a researcher, I support this type of love which is realistic and the lovers see each other as a human being. Consequently, there is no human without fault. This feeling makes them be kind and forgive each other. They see themselves as two hemispheres; by negotiating, they can complete each other as one circle. Both have their own world, at the same time they have a share world. Their satisfaction reaches a point that makes Donne ask the following RQ in stanza three. The fifth RQ is "Where can we finde two better hemispheres Without sharpe North, without declining West?" (Lines17-18) The modernized spelling of these words 'finde' and 'sharpe' are find and sharp. "Sharpe" stands for cold and "declining "for sunset (ibid: 50). Semantically, this positive wh-question is like a negative assertion. It means they cannot find two better hemispheres. In other words, they cannot find two better lovers except themselves. So, they are so confident; they agree with their share world. There are two points support that this RQ conveys negative assertion. First, in the second part of the question in (line 18), Donne requires a condition which is impossible. Thus, it is a point to discover that it is a denial question. Second, in (lines14-16), Donne describes the lovers (himself and his beloved) positively as her eye reflecting him, and his eye reflecting her. This suggests that each one just sees the other in terms of love; they are satisfied with each other. Pragmatically, this RQ has the illocutionary forces of denying and boasting speech acts as well. This opinion can be supported by Nutt (ibid) who believes that Donne proudly proclaims their superiority and unity as two halves of one sphere. 81
The previous discussion of RQs in Donne's "The Good-Morrow" can be summarized in the following table:
_
question
biased
Were we not wean'd till
Yes- No
Postively
2
then?
In terms of ISAs
Negatively
Functions of RQ
wh-
NPIs
1-2
of
WNPI
we lov'd?
2.
Type Orientation
What thou, and I Did, till
Types of RQs
RQs
1.
Line No.
Series of N.
Table (3) RQs used in Donne's "The Good -Morrow"
SNPI
_
Negative assertion
_
_
Sarcasm
_
_
Affirmative
biased Question
3.
But, suck'd on countrey
3
Yes- No
pleasures, childishly?
Positively biased
assertion
Question
4.
Or snorted we in the
4
Yes- No
seaven sleepers den?
and
reproach
Positively
_
_
biased
Sarcasm
and
reproach
Question 5.
Where can we finde two
17-18
better hemispheres?
Wh-
Negatively
Question
biased
_
_
Denying
and
boasting
Without sharpe North, without declining West? Total
3Yes–No Questions
2 Negative
0WNPI
0SNPI
1Negative assertion,2Sarcasm
biased and 2Wh- Question 3 Positively biased
1Affirmative assertion 2Reproaches 1 Denying 1 Boasting
82
4.3 Analysis of George Herbert's Poems 4.3.1 "The Collar" This poem is a type of monologue. The speaker is the poet himself who is in internal struggle between his desire as a man to enjoy himself in his present world and his spiritual desire as a priest. Herbert has scarified all worldly ambition and the pleasures of life. The life of a priest means a rejection of all worldly interests. Thus, he feels restless and wants to be free from this bondage in the church. There is a dramatic audience who is God but he is silent until the last four lines. Briefly, religion is the theme of the poem (Lall, 2010: 149). A protest is discovered in the very opening lines in this poem. For instance, when Herbert states that he struck the board and cried "No more. I will abroad." It means that he would no longer continue with his life in the church, but rather he would move out of the church to enjoy freedom (ibid: 155 ; Brakett, 2008:72 ). The poem consists of thirty-six lines of various lengths. The collar represents restrictions. Lawrence et al. (1985: 261) state that Herbert feels he has been restrained to an ideal service. He uses these words as cage and rope of sands. Also, there is no "harvest but a thorn." He rebels against this situation. He prefers pleasure and irresponsibility rather than responsibility. So, he complains priest's life because he serves without getting rewards. The poem can be divided into three parts: the angry questions which are symbol of rebellion (lines 1-16); the poet's suggestion to escape from the service as a priest (lines 17-32); and the call of God and the speaker's acceptance of the call (lines 33-36). Lall (2010: 154) indicates that the word 'collar' has different meaning; it means the neckband attaches clothes like a coat or a shirt. A collar also put round the neck of a dog to show that the dog belongs to somebody and is not a 'stray animal'.
83
Herbert poses a list of RQs "Shall I ever sigh and pine?" Then he states that "My lines and life are free; free as the road." He displays that there is nothing physical preventing his travel. There is metonymy as the speaker asks this question "Shall I still be in suit?" Here, his clothes represent his life style; the suit presents him as religious man. Herbert mentions that there was wine before his sighs dried it. There was corn before it drowned in his tears. Then Herbert asks himself about the loss of something; he wonders "Is the year onely lost to me? Have I no bayes to crown it? No flowers, no garlands gay? all blasted? All wasted?" Bay was shaped into a "wreath of victory"; the speaker implies that as a young man, he should score victories of his own in life in any field of life perhaps business and sport (Brackett, 2008: 72). Lawrence et al. (1985: 262) point out that Herbert's complaining and protesting go continuously. Then he decides to escape from this idealism bondage until the final four lines. However, Herbert's angry argument with himself ends when another voice enters the poem. Herbert thought that someone calls him 'Child'. Herbert unexpectedly without any hesitation replies "My Lord." This response shows that he has returned to God as well as to himself. Brackett (2008:73) illustrates that Herbert urges people to open their eyes to Gods glory and the eternity promised. Herbert wants to show that in spite of one's sin and objection, "an acceptance of God as Lord will open one's life to receive God's grace." Herbert emphasizes that God will care for all, as parents care for a child. Below are all the RQs used in the poem: What? Shall I ever sigh and pine? (Line 3) … Shall I be still in suit? (Line 6) 84
… What I have lost with cordiall fruit? (Line 9) … Is the yeare onely lost to me? (Line13) Have I no bayes to crown it? (Line14) No flowers, no garlands gay? all blasted? (Line15) All wasted? (Line 16) Lawrence et al. (1985:261) state that this poem represents the poet's complaints about priest's life, while Brackett (2008: 72) describes them as protests. The first RQ is "What?", "Shall I ever sigh and pine?" (Line 3) From a semantic point of view, this positive RQ is equivalent to a negative assertion, i.e. afterwards, he will never sigh and pine. In other words, Herbert wants to enjoy his life with pleasures out of church because he seems to disagree with his priest's life by which he never enjoys with any worldly pleasures. The pleasures of a secular life come to his mind. He has sighed and felt longing for those pleasures. He decides to leave priesthood with which all worldly pleasures are forbidden (Lall, 2010: 151). According to Christian rules; the priests must devote themselves for serving others in the churches and divorce themselves with all types of pleasures which is very hard rule because human beings must always be in struggle with their desires even innate and natural ones. Since, he wants to leave this service to be free and never sigh (loud exhalation which expresses sorrow) and pine (waste away with grief).To emphasize his decision which leaving this service; he mentions in (line 4), that he can leave his life as a priest and there is no physical prevention but there is spiritual struggle. From a 85
pragmatic point of view, this RQ holds the illocutionary force of complaint and protest as well. It is a complaint because Herbert feels that his priest life full of grief and it is a protest because he reacts and decides to leave and make no more service. The second RQ is "Shall I be still in suit?" (Line 6) The speaker asks himself that must he always remain in suit. It is an obligation to wear a special type of suit which is a symbol of priesthood. Semantically, this positive yes-no question equals negative assertion, i.e. he should no more remain with his suit. In other words, he will no longer wear that suit which symbolizes him as religious man. In the following line, he shows the degree of his protest; he says that he has not reap anything
but thorn
Pragmatically, this RQ, again, has the illocutionary force of protesting .He rejects his present state as a priest even his clothes because these clothes are specialized just for priests. The third RQ is
"What I have lost with cordiall fruit?" (Line 9)
The word 'cordiall' is archaic word, its modernized spelling is cordial. From semantic point of view, it is equivalent to positive assertion. So, it is positively biased. Herbert wants to say that he has lost all things which are symbols of pleasure like wine. It means he has lost cordial fruit (a pleasant drink made of fruit).So, depending on Herbert's perspective; he has not gotten anything in his life in the church but thorns. In other words, he is not rewarded or appreciated to his grieve, nevertheless; he is forbidden from all present pleasures. From pragmatic point of view, this RQ carries the illocutionary force of complaining and persuading. Herbert discovers his fruitless life in the church to
86
persuade the reader/hearer in diplomatic way that his decision to leave the church is his right and the rightest decision. The fourth RQ is "Is the yeare onely lost to me?" (Line 13) These words 'yeare' and 'onely' are archaic words; their modernized spelling are year and only. Semantically speaking, this RQ renders negative assertion. It communicates opposite polarity. It means he lost something else not just year (time).The word 'only' uses to emphasize and tell the reader/hearer there is something else which are pointed in the next RQs . Pragmatically speaking, it has the illocutionary force of complaining and persuading. The last RQs are "Have I no bayes to crown it? No flowers, no garlands gay? all blasted? All wasted?" (Lines 14-16) The modernized spelling of word 'bayes' is bays. These RQs are considered as answers to the preceding question in (line 13). Semantically speaking, the questions in (line 14) and the first part of (line 15) are equivalent to negative assertions. They mean he has no bays to crown it. Also, he has no flowers and garlands gay. West and Endicott (1955: 27) explain 'bay' as a tree whose leaves in old times were made into crowns for successful poets or winners of race. Garlands gay is as a circle of leaves or flowers of bright colour, often used as a sign of victory (ibid: 137). If he has no bays to crown it in his life (as a symbol of victory), he has achieved nothing by having servant as a priest of the church (Lall, 2010: 153). So, Herbert wants to say that he has not just lost time but rather he lost every reward like crown which symbolizes victory or a great achievement. He 87
wants to assert that as a young man he could have made important things in his life. Then, he could have had crown of winners on his head. Since, he has not participated in any important field. Consequently, he has not gotten anything. Pragmatically speaking, these RQs have the illocutionary force of complaining because he expresses his grief and lacking all worldly pleasures. As well as, it carries the illocutionary force of persuading; by these RQs he wants to persuade the reader/hearer that he has made the right decision. Also, "…all blasted? All wasted?" (Lines 15-16), semantically, these RQs are in fact answers to the previous RQs in (lines 13-15). So, they are understood as positive assertions. It can be asked why RQs are used instead of DSAs in this poem? There are some reasons beyond preferring RQs .The speaker believes that there is dramatic audience who is his creator (God). Also, he complains and protests about his priest's life for God because his service is for sake of God.
88
1
Shall I ever sigh and
3
pine?
2
Shall I be still in
6
suit?
Yes–No
Negatively
Question
biased
Yes–No
Negatively
WNPI
Ever
SNPI
_
Functions of RQ s
NPIs
Types
Orientation
Types of RQ
Line No.
RQs
of
Serious of No.
Table (4) RQs used in Marvell's "The Collar"
Complaining and protesting
_
_
Protesting
_
_
Complaining and
Question biased
3
What I have lost with
9
cordiall fruit?
4
Is the yeare onely lost
13
to me?
5
Have I no bayes to
14-16
Wh-
Positively
Question
biased
Yes–No
Negatively
Question
biased
Yes –No
Negatively
crown it? No flowers, no garlands gay? all
persuading
_
_
Complaining and persuading
_
_
Complaining and
biased
persuading
4Yes –No
4Negatively
2 Protesting
Question
biased
1Wh-
1 Positively
Question
biased
Question
blasted? All wasted?
Total
1WNPI
0SNPI
3 persuading 4Complaining
89
4.3.2 "Jordan (1)" The speaker in this poem is the poet himself. Lawrence et al. (1985: 263-4) point out that this poem represents protest and suggestion as well. The theme of the poem is about poetry; what kind of poetry Herbert criticizes and what kind he suggests and supports. This poem is the most complex of Herbert's poem. It consists of three five-line stanzas. Brackett (2008: 242) illustrates that this poem is written at times in reaction towards the poetry of others. It is written as an answer poem to Sir Philip Sidney. Sidney designed a sequence of 108 sonnets and 11 songs related to the unsuccessful romance. In this poem a reply is offered to Philip. This style is called 'Repartee' commonly known as answer poem in which the poet replies another work by a poem. Herbert declared that he would use the sonnet form to 'sacred love', instead of 'erotic love.' Herbert criticizes the conventional way about using traditional topic. That's why he selects untraditional topic. Herbert selected the tittle 'Jordan' which refers for the biblical river. In the first two stanzas, Herbert criticizes the other poets who use conventional style of poetry. They describe things in exaggeration way that they exceed reality. Thereby, they separate poems from ordinary life which causes to lessen its effect. In the last stanza, Herbert brings example of shepherds. He wants to say that shepherds are honest and simple, let them sing in their languages and feelings. Shepherds, in real life, are different from poetic shepherd. So, reality differs from their equivalent in poetry. Then he precisely states that "My God,
90
My King", by this expression; he means that he will only write religious poems and his King is only his God. Below are all the RQs which are found in the first two stanzas of the poem: Who sayes that fictions onely and false hair Become a verse? Is there in truth no beautie? Is all good structure in a winding stair? May no lines passse, except they do their dutie Not to a true but, painted chair? Is it no verse, except enchanted groves And sudden arbours shadow caurse-spunne lines? Must purling streams refresh a lovers love? Must all be vail'd, while he that reades, divines, Catching the sense at two removes?
(Lines 1-10)
The first RQ is "Who sayes that fictions onely and false hair Become a verse?" (Lines 1-2) The modernized spelling of these two archaic words 'sayes' and 'onely' are says and only. Semantically, this wh-question is like a negative assertion. So, it shows its contradictory. It does not mean that no one says that only fictions and false hair become a verse, but rather, it means it is not true that fictions only and 91
false hair become a verse. 'False hair' represents painted hair, i.e. artificial hair not natural hair. Herbert uses this expression for expressing his criticism. In other words, he wants to say that why only fiction (anything which is only imagined not fact) and artificial thing are taken to poetic topic. In fact always natural thing is more attractive than artificial thing. For instance, compare natural hair with painted hair. Pragmatically, this RQ bears issuing criticism, protest, and sarcasm. He criticises his contemporary poets who think like that. It also, renders protest speech act, because he protests and disagrees with their opinions. He decides to break this conventional opinion for writing and choosing topics of poems. It may also reveal sarcasm but in a very hidden and diplomatic way. The second RQ is "Is there in truth no beautie?" (Line 2) 'Beautie' is archaic word, its updated spelling is beauty. Semantically speaking, this negative yes-no question is like a positive assertion, i.e. there is beauty in truth. Herbert means that poetry does not necessarily deal with fictions in order to be beautiful. In other words, he wants to claim that and assure the other poets that truth is full of beauty. Pragmatically speaking, it holds sarcasm and suggestion speech acts. Herbert makes sarcasm of their thinking and style. At the same time, he suggests that truth includes not just beauty but beauty is truth. So, truth and beauty are parallel. The third RQ is "Is all good structure in a winding stair?" (Line 3) From semantic view, this RQ is negatively biased. It means that all good structure is not in a winding stair. Winding stair refers to these two meanings: (as its literal meaning; a staircase in which there are several turnings), or it refers to the structure of sonnet (Brackett, 2008: 243).
92
In other words he wants to say that the other poets relate or restrict beauty just to structure of sonnet; they do not concern with its topic and proposition .If a winding stair is taken as its literal meaning; it means that why other poets think of problematic and complex style in their poems like a winding stair. From pragmatic point of view, this RQ carries these speech acts criticism and suggestion as well. On the one hand, Herbert criticises the other poets, because they just busy themselves with worthless things. On the other hand, he suggests that to think about other thing not just structure of poems. The fourth RQ is "May no lines passse, except they do their dutie Not to a true but, painted chair?" (Lines 4-5) These two words passe and dutie are archaic words their modernized spelling are pass and duty. Semantically, this negative yes-no question equals to a positive assertion. It means there are many lines come up to the required standard or achieve the level of excellence without painted chair (means artificial or imaginary gods like Venus).In other words, Herbert does not accept secular poetry which generally deals with the beauty of women and with men falling in love with
women
(Lall,2010: 88-9). Pragmatically, this RQ has the
illocutionary force of issuing criticism and suggestion as well. He criticizes the other poets who think that only secular poetry can reach the standard level and due that they prefer erotic love. He also, suggests and prefers the other type of poetry which is divine poetry deals with sacred love. The fifth RQ is "Is it no verse, except enchanted groves And sudden arbours shadow course-spunne lines?" (Lines 6-7)
93
The updated spelling of the word spunne is spun. Semantically, this rhetorical yes-no question is like a positive assertion, i.e. it is a verse without enchanted groves and sudden arbours shadow course-spun lines. Arbour (is a seat or walk in a garden shaded by trees), this shadow is made by the top of the trees which are interrelated roughly to shadow the lines or the pathway between them .Herbert wants to say that is there no verse without magical forest and sudden shadows of trees? In brief, is there no verse without fiction and artificial imagination? Off course, there is verse without fake imagination. Pragmatically, this RQ holds again criticism in sarcastic way and suggestion speech acts, too. The sixth RQ is" Must purling streams refresh a lovers love?" (Line 8) From semantic perspective, this RQ is equivalent to a negative assertion. It means it must not purling streams refresh a lover's love. It must not pearling stream refresh a lover's love, because it is not real, but it is mere fancy. From pragmatic perspective, this RQ simultaneously renders criticism in sarcastic way and command speech acts. Herbert makes a command by this RQ. He commands the other poets to separate from using unrealistic style and expression. The last RQ is "Must all be vail'd, while he that reades, divines, Catching the sense at two removes?
(Lines 6-10)
The word reades and vailed are archaic words their restructured spelling are reads and veiled. Semantically speaking, this RQ is like a negative assertion. It means that it must not all be vail'd, while he (the reader) reads that, divines (to guess what is hidden), catching the sense at two removes. In other words, poems must not be veiled with two covers, and the reader must not be obliged to remove two covers and guess the hidden words to catch the sense. Herbert wants to say that the poem is difficult in its nature and it must not increase its difficulty 94
by unrealistic image. Pragmatically speaking, this RQ has illocutionary force of criticism and command as well. He criticises the other poets because he believes that the subject of poetry is itself difficult and their style is difficult as well. This leads poetry more obstacle because the reader wants to remove two covers to get the sense of the poem. At the same time he commands them to remove and separate away from this fruitless style. The proposition behind using these RQs instead of direct way is that Herbert could criticise, suggest, and command in form of RQs. So, every RQ may have multiple functions and this characteristic cannot be found with direct way. As well as, RQs do not impose on the addressee while direct way does so. Consequently, he says many things just in few RQs. Therefore, RQs are economical means.
95
Positively
Question
biased
Yes-No
Negatively
_
of ISAs
Yes-No
_
in terms
biased
SNPI
s of RQ
Question
and false hair Become a
WNPI
Function
Negatively
on
Wh-
Orientati
1-2
RQ
Types of
1.
Who sayes that fictions onely
Types of NPIs
Line No.
1
of No. RQs
Serious
Table (5) RQs used in Herbert's "Jordan (I)"
Criticism, protest, and sarcasm
verse?
2
3
Is there in truth no beautie?
2
Is all good structure in a
3
winding stair?
_
_
Sarcasm and suggestion
_
_
Criticism suggestion
and
_
_
Criticism suggestion
and
_
_
Criticism, sarcasm , and
biased Question
4
May no lines passse except
4-5
Yes-No
they do their dutie / Not to a
biased Question
true but, painted chair?
5
Is
it
no
enchanted sudden
verse, groves/
arbours
Positively
except
6-7
Yes-No
And
Positively biased
suggestion
Question
shadow
course-spunne lines? 6
Must purling streams refresh
8
Yes-No
a lovers love?
Negatively
_
_
biased Question
7
Must all be vail'd, while he that
reades,
criticism, sarcasm
divines,
9-10
Yes-No
/
Catching the sense at two
, and command Negatively
_
_
0WNPI
0SNPI
criticism and command
biased Question
removes? Total
1WhQuestion
3Positively biased
6Yes-No
4Negativel y biased
1 Protest, 2 Commands 4Sarcasms,4Suggestions 6 Criticisms
96
4.3.3 "Love (III)" Lawrence et al.( 1985 : 265 ) state that the poem involves two themes: love and religion; because the figure love is not clearly 'masculine' till the last stanza in which Love is referred to Lord, so Love is understood in 'romantic' and as in 'religious' terms. Consequently, the poem involves these two themes. Brackett (2008: 255) points out that this poem is about a dialogue between Love (Lord) who plays the role of a kind 'host' and 'a guest.' Lall (2010:205) states that it is a dialogue between the God and the poet's soul. The poet imagines that his soul after death, stands before God and feels very conscious of its sinfulness. Lawrence et al. (1985:266) state that the speaker expresses protesting and selfaccusing while Love reminds him by the RQs. This poem consists of three six-line stanzas. In the first stanza, Love invites and welcomes the guest, but the guest's soul draws him back because of his guilt and sin. The soul, however, cannot take what is presented because still doubts his worthiness and' burdened' by sin (Fish, 1978: 119). Love observes the guest's slow coming that’s why the Love drew nearer to the guest and asks him if he lacks anything. In the second stanza, through the guest's answer is discovered that the guest desires to be worthy to be there as it pointed in" worthy to be here". The word 'here ' throughout the poem, belongs to Heaven. The Love is answered that he will be there, but the guest indicates via RQ, that he is unkind and ungrateful. Thus, he cannot look on Love, but Love took his hand as a gesture of forgiveness. Finally, in the third stanza, the guest is commanded to taste Love's sweetness and the guest has agreed. At the end, the poet by this sentence "So I did sit and eat" returns to the beginning of the poem when he is invited.
97
Below are three RQs which occurred in the poem: "I, the unkinde, ungratefull?" (Line 9) … Who made the eyes, but I ?" (Line 12) … "Who bore the blame?" (Line 15) The first RQ is "I, the unkinde, ungratefull?" (Line 9) The restructured spelling of words unkinde and ungratefull are unkind and ungrateful. Semantically, this verb less RQ is equivalent to a positive assertion. It means the guest was unkind and thankless toward the Love's blessings. So, he could never look at Love because his feeling of shame. There are evidences to prove that this RQ renders a positive assertion: (see appendix No. 2 "C" lines 12) the guest says "yet my soul drew back, guiltie of dust and sin." Another evidence is in (lines 9-10) when the geust says "Ah, my deare, I cannot look on thee." Pragmatically, this RQ has the illocutionary force of an accusation. The guest accuses himself as unkind and thankless one. Surely, if someone has these two unacceptable characteristics, he is possible to make guilty as he is pointed in (line, 2). Due to these characteristic's relationship with crime, for example, if someone is unkind, it is very possible to make crime. The second RQ is "Who made the eyes, but I?" (Line 12) Semantically, this positive RQ is like a negative assertion. It means no one created eyes except Love (Lord).In other words, when the guest asserted Love about his unkindness and ungratefulness in a question form, Love gestures implicitly that He (Love) sees and knows that, and it is very logical, because if 98
someone creates eyes, it is very normal to have unlimited ability to see and be aware of all things. Pragmatically, this RQ carries the illocutionary force of deny and by which two other speech acts reminding and boast are rendered as well. Love denies that anyone else could make the eyes. To persuade and prove that He (Love) sees all things; He reminds the guest that eyes are only made and gave by Love. Boast is also appeared by the utterance "but I"; the Love prides with making eyes. The third RQ is "Who bore the blame?" (Line 15) From semantic perspective, this RQ is equivalent to a positive assertion. It means there is someone who bore the blame. In other words, Love says the guest that he does not blame. This RQ is context dependent and its meaning will be more obvious by the utterance "And know you not know", which means you not know that someone bore all the Christians' blame (see appendix No. 2"C" line 15). In other words, it means you do not blame because the Christ previously paid the penalty of all the Christians' guilties. From pragmatic perspective, this RQ bears assurance for forgiveness and reminding. There are evidences which prove that this RQ implies assurance for forgiveness. First, forgiveness is the most prominent characteristic of Love. Second, this RQ is preceded by a sentence "Love took my hand and smiling", which reveals that Love is not in anger mood. Third, it is followed by the sentence "My deare, then I will serve", which remarks satisfying and pleasure. Love reminds and assures the guest that he does not blame. Lawrence et al. (1985: 266) state that according to Christian belief Christ paid the penalty instead of all Christians through the Crucifixion. Since, Christ bears all Christian sins. Consequently, the followers do not blame, because Christ's sacrifice.
99
The reader/hearer may wonder why RQs are used instead of direct accusation and reminding. There are reasons which induce using RQs in this poem: the first RQ is used by the guest who addresses the Love (Lord). The addressee is in a very high position; He (Love) is his creator. The subject is also, about self-accusation which causes annoyance and brings shame. While, the second and third RQs which are used by Love (Lord),although He(Love) is very superior than the addressee, but the subject is about reminding which is always used in form of question .
100
ungratefull?"
2
3
Total
terms of ISAs
Positively
Functions of RQ in
Verbless
of NPIs
Orientation
"I, the unkinde, 9
Types of RQ
1
Line No.
Types
1. RQs
Serious of No.
Table (6) RQs used in Herbert's "Love (III)"
WNPI
SNPI
_
_
Accusation
Negatively _
_
Deny, Reminding and boast
_
Reminding and assurance
biased
Who made the 12 eyes, but I ?"
WhQuestion
"And know you 15 not," sayes Love "Who bore the blame?"
WhQuestion
Biased Positively biased
_
1Verbless 2Positively 0WNPI 0SNPI 1 Accusation biased 2Wh1 Denying Questions 1Negatively 1 Boast biased 1Assurance 2 Reminding
101
4.4 Analysis of Andrew Marvell's Poems 4.4.1 "A Dialogue between the Resolved Soul and Created Pleasure" This poem is in the form of dialogue, there is a conflict between the "resolved Soul and created Pleasure." Pleasure has been personified in the poem. The word 'resolved' in the title means determined or resolute, while the word 'created' refers to the fact that pleasure is a part of God's creation like everything else in this world. This struggle is a natural thing of human existence. However, in general, the result of the struggle like that; weak soul falls a pray to the temptations of Pleasure while a firm soul succeeds in resisting all such attractive things. In the opening stanza, a speaker (may be the poet himself) calls upon the soul to arm itself against all the temptations. The soul has to arm itself with the shield of faith. The soul has proved its divine character by overcoming upon all the obstructions which separate it from its belief and duty. Pleasure begins the debate by offering the soul a number of offers while the soul rejects every one confidently with bringing an excuse for each (Lall, 2007: 31-2). It is familiar to human being if someone aims to separate the other one from his/her belief or duty; s/he offers some promises or gifts which begin from simple to a valuable, just to make him/her busy with the offers to fail to perform or forgive the main duty. Pleasure praises the soul and names it as the Lord of the earth. Then pleasure offers the soul fruits and flowers to join with them and states that they are ready to entertain you (the soul).The soul rejects it and its excuse is that it cannot stay more. Pleasure offers pillows with the feathers of birds and the bed covers with rose-petals to be soft and comfortable. The soul does not accept this gift either. The soul's excuse is that it cannot get rest from the soft bed because it 102
can obtain more comfortable from its duty. Pleasure offers another present which a piece of earth in a sweet place that makes the soul to see itself as important as god. The soul again continues in resisting and refusing it and says that it is too far to be a superior one and see itself as a god because it is one of the creatures of the Lord. Then, pleasure invites the soul to look at its face but the soul says that it is satisfied. As the last offer to the first attempt; pleasure offers sweet tunes of music to the soul. Though the soul feels somewhat interested in music, it also rejects it. In spite of rejecting all the offers; the soul bravely tells the Pleasure not to attempt anymore and stop offering further temptation to it. Chorus (as a witness to this struggle) says that the earth cannot show any sight so amazing as a single soul fighting against the attacks of the tempting pleasures. Heaven looks with delight at such a fight. Chorus tells the soul to go on resisting because still there are some more temptations (Lall, 2007: 33). Pleasure tries for the second time and offers four other temptations. The initial offer is a nice and lovely woman. The soul overcomes upon this offer which may defeat many souls. The soul says if the earth's things are so lovely, how much more lovely must be those things which are to be found in Heaven. Pleasure tries continuously to defeat the soul so it offers another valuable thing which is gold by which one can buy many things available on earth. The soul still challenges and refuses the gold and its excuse is that "anything that can be purchased and sold is not so valuable." Pleasure presents another offer (fame) which can be achieved through war or peace by which half of the world will become the soul's slaves, and the other half will become its friends. The soul, as usual, rejects it with a nice response. The soul states that friendship does not have meaning if it proves untrue with itself; also, slaves are meaningless if it cannot overcome the desire (ibid: 43-5). Pleasure, as the last attempt, offers 103
knowledge to the soul. Pleasure tells the soul that it can enable the soul to read the future, and by the knowledge, the soul can climb to Heaven. The soul again refuses knowledge which is the last offer and the soul's excuse is that nobody can climb up to Heaven merely by the extent of his/her knowledge. One can get to Heaven only by humility. At the end, Chorus congratulates the soul about its victory and its resisting confidently. Chorus says the soul must celebrate about its victory because it has rejected all the pleasures of this world. Whatever pleasures now remain are to be found in Heaven and these pleasure are eternal (Lall, 2007: 35). Below are all RQs which occur in the poem: If things of Sight such Heavens be, What Heavens are we cannot see?
(Lines, 55-6)
… Wer't a price who'ld value Gold? And that's worth nought that can be sold. Wilt thou all the Glory have That War or Peace commend? Half the World shall be thy Slave The other half thy Friend. What Friends, if to my self untrue? What Slaves, unless I captive you? (61-8)
104
The first RQ is asked by the soul "If things of Sight such Heavens be, What Heavens are we cannot see?" (Lines, 55-6) From semantic perspective, this RQ is like a positive assertion. It means if visible things, existing on the earth, be so lovely, then the sights which we cannot see here on earth but which are available above in Heaven must be more lovely and wonderful. In brief, the soul says that, if earthly beauty can be so lovely, heavenly beauty must be more lovely and delightful. The word 'heavens' has used to mean lovely or charming (Lall, 2007: 43). As a researcher, I believe that although women are very soft and kind entities and physically not as strong as men, they can defeat very strong and wild men, because in general, men are very weak in front of women except those who restrict with their beliefs and principles; so their beliefs are favoured upon all other wishes. From pragmatic perspective, this RQ in fact is used as an answer to the previous offer (see appendixNo.3 "A", lines 51-4) when pleasure offers a very nice and lovely woman. This RQ has the illocutionary force of refusing and affirmative assertion. The soul refuses the Pleasure's offer indirectly and at the same time implicitly states that Heavens' women are more delightful. The second RQ is asked by the soul "Wer't a price who'ld value Gold? And that's worth nought that can be sold." (Lines, 61-2) Semantically, this RQ is like a negative assertion. It asserts that gold is something by which one can buy things. It represents the power to purchase, and nothing that can be purchased or sold is valuable. The word 'price' here means "the capacity to buy." Nobody would attach any importance to gold if it did not have the power to buy the other commodities (Lall, ibid: 35). Depending on the soul's answer; gold is not valuable. Pragmatically, this RQ acts as an answer to the previous offer in which Pleasure offers the soul gold and 105
exaggerates it as so valuable thing. This RQ has the illocutionary force of rejecting (refusing) .The soul's answer concurrently, indicates refusing the offer and disagrees that gold is valuable thing because it can be purchased and sold, so gold has no intrinsic value. The third RQ is "Wilt thou all the Glory have That War or Peace commend? Half the World shall be thy Slave The other half thy Friend." (Lines, 63-6) Here, Pleasure tells the soul that it will have glory which may be achieved through heroic in war; or through works of peace. Half the world shall be your slave and the other half shall be your friend. This RQ can be interpreted as having dual functions. Its primary function which is RQ is like a positive assertion. Pleasure offers the soul glory that can slave half of the world and enjoy with the other half as friend if it is accepted by the soul. On the other hand, it has secondary function which is asking an answer. Pragmatically, this RQ has illocutionary force of offer, promise, and suggestion .Pleasure offers fame to the soul and through the offer Pleasure promises to the soul power to govern over half of the world and enjoy the friendship with other half, if the soul accepts the offer. At the same time, implicitly expresses its viewpoint that when someone as a leader of a country achieves fame by winning war or working at providing peace, s/he will enslave half of the world and makes friendship with the other half. The fourth RQ is "What Friends, if to my self untrue? (67). This RQ can be counted as an answer to the previous RQ in (lines, 63-6). Semantically, this RQ equals to a negative assertion. It means friends have no 106
meaning if the soul with itself is untrue. In other words, glory cannot bring friends if the soul is not true with itself. Pragmatically, this RQ has illocutionary force of rejecting (refusing) and suggestion. This RQ is understood as answer. Through the answer refusing is rendered so in its reply the soul refuses glory. At the same time, the soul makes a suggestion that if someone wants to achieve glory; s/ he must be true with her/ himself. The fifth RQ is "What Slaves, unless I captive you?" (68) This RQ can be counted as an answer to the previous RQ in (lines, 63-6). Semantically, this RQ equals to a negative assertion. It means slaves have no meaning if the soul cannot overcome Pleasure. In other words, glory, again, cannot bring slaves if the soul itself is dominated by Pleasure. Pragmatically, this RQ has illocutionary force of rejecting and suggestion. This RQ is also understood as answer. Through the answer refusing again is rendered so in its reply the soul refuses glory. Concurrently, the soul makes a suggestion that if someone wants to achieve glory; there is also another important principle which is s/he must be true with her/ himself and not be dominated by anything else like pleasure.
107
Table (7) RQs used in Marvell's "A Dialogue between the Resolves Soul and
such
Question
biased
SNPI
_
_
terms of ISAs
Positively
WNPI
Functions of RQ in
Wh-
NPIs
55-56
Types of
Orientation
Sight
Types of RQ
If things of Heavens be,
Line No.
1.
RQs
Series of No.
Created Pleasure"
Rejecting and affirmative
What Heavens are we cannot see?
2
Wer't a price who'ld value Gold?
assertion
61-62
Yes-No
Negatively
Question
biased
Yes-No
Positively
_
_
Rejecting
_
_
Offer, promise, and suggestion
_
_
Rejecting and suggestion
_
_
Rejecting and suggestion
0WNPI
0SNPI
1Offer
And that's worth nought that can be sold.
3
Wilt thou all the Glory have That War or Peace commend? Half the World shall be thy Slave
63-66
biased Question
The other half thy Friend.
4 5
T
What Friends, if to myself untrue?
67
What Slaves, unless I captive you?
68
Wh-
Negatively
Question
biased
Wh-
Negatively
question
biased
2Yes-No
ot al
Question 3WhQuestion
2Positively biased 3Negatively biased
1Affirmative assertion 1Prosime 3Suggestions 4Rejectings
108
4.4.2 "A Dialogue between the Soul and Body" The theme of the poem can be religious or philosophical debate. Marvell does not attempt to resolve the debate between the soul and the body. The poem contains complaint; the soul complains of its imprisonment inside the body. At the same time, the body complains against the tyranny of the soul (Brackett, 2008:111).The poem is in the form of a dialogue. The conflict, as it is known, continues between the Body and the soul of a human being forever. Both the body and the soul are regarded as separate entities. The poem consists of four stanzas; each of the first three stanzas includes ten lines while the last stanza contains fourteen lines. Lall (2007: 83) indicates that in the first stanza, the soul complains about its imprisonment inside the body which is like a "dungeon'' for it. The soul feels that it is a prisoner of the body in many ways. It feels that all the body's bones like bolts on the door of a prisoncell which holds a prisoner. The body's hands and feet are similar to chains for the soul. In the second stanza, the body also, has its own complaints against the soul, because it feels that the soul keeps it under all kinds of restraints, thus behaving like a tyrant. The body compares the soul to a thin, pointed stake. This stake has been driven into the body and allowed to remain there. The soul is like an instrument of torture to the body. The soul is spread out in all the body. The body feels that the soul uses it only to give an outlet to its desire. The body states that the soul gives it warm and move, but it thinks that they are needless. The body can never rest because it is possessed by the soul. In the third stanza, the soul again complains and asks what magic power has made it a prisoner inside the body and forces it to suffer for the sorrows of the body. Whenever the body suffers from any disease or any physical trouble, the 109
soul feels distress too. However, the soul's pain does not just relate to the body's disease, but rather the body's restoration to its health is more painful and worse. When the body seems to be threatened with death, the soul will soon be released from its imprisonment and go back to Heaven; but by the body's turning to its health, the soul feels like sailor who has been ship-wrecked. In the fourth stanza, the body complains too that no medicine can cure the diseases which the soul afflicts the body. The body has to suffer effects of all the emotions experienced by the soul, like the emotion of hope, fear, love, hate, joy, and sorrow, because the soul does not allow the body to forget these experiences. The body states that all sins which the body commits are originated from feeling and emotions by the soul. It is the soul that has made the body to reside in a house fit for sin (Lall, 2007: 84). Below are all the RQs used in this poem: O who shall, from this Dungeon raise A Soul insalv'd so many wayes? … Oh who shall me deliver whole, From bonds of this Tyrannic Soul? … What Magick could me thus confine Within anothers Grief to pine? … What but a Soul could have the wit 110
To build me up for Sin so fit? The first RQ is "O who shall, from this Dungeon, raise A Soul insalv'd so many wayes?" (Lines, 1-2) The updated spelling of words 'inslav'd' and 'wayes' are enslaved and ways. This positive wh-question is equivalent to a negative assertion. It means no one will be able to liberate the soul from this 'Dungeon' in which it is imprisoned by many ways. 'Dungeon' refers to the body. The soul feels that the bones of the body have been fastened on it like bolts on a prison-cell and its feet and hands like fetter. There are evidences which verify that this RQ is like a negative assertion. The soul describes the prison in a way that it cannot be saved because it is prisoned by many ways in the sense it seems hopeless of liberty. Also, the answer of the question is very obvious to humans that no one can release it except God. Pragmatically, this RQ has the illocutionary force of complaint and assertion. The soul expresses its complaints and annoyance towards the body. Through the complaint; it reveals its standpoint towards the body which likens it to a prison fastens in many ways. The second RQ is "Oh who shall me deliver whole, From bonds of this Tyrannic Soul"? (Lines, 11-12) As the soul has previously asked; now the body asks who would release it from the restraints imposed upon it by the tyrannical soul. Semantically speaking, this positive RQ renders a negative assertion. It means no one will liberate the body in its restraints of the dictatorial soul. In other words no one can save the body because the soul dominates it entirely. The soul moves the body otherwise; the body is like an inanimate thing without power, hopes, and feelings. Pragmatically speaking, this RQ has the illocutionary force of 111
complaint and accusation as well. The body complains about its distress life within the soul and it accuses the soul as tyrannical entity. The third RQ is "What Magick could me thus confine Within anothers Grief to pine?" (Lines, 21-22) The restructured spelling of word magick is magic. The soul asks about the magical power that could make it restricted within another's grief to pine. From a semantic view, this positive RQ is equivalent to a positive assertion. It means there is a magical power that could confine the soul to suffer for the sorrows of the body. In other words, there is a metaphysical power that could make the soul suffer within any problem that faces the body. It does not carry its contrary polarity because it is a fact that the soul and the body are combined and interrelated with each other by another external factor who is God. So, they do not live together voluntarily. From pragmatic point of view, this RQ has the illocutionary force of complaint and assertion. The soul complains about association with another grief. Through the complaint, it asserts that collecting both the soul and the body and staying with each other is not under their ability. The fourth RQ is "What but a Soul could have the wit To build me up for Sin so fit?" (Lines, 41-42) Semantically, this RQ is similar to a positive assertion. It means only, the soul could have the wit to build the body up for sin so fit. In other words, the body states that only the soul has the wit to make the body a house fit for sin to inhabit in. The body is a means to outlet the soul's desire. The body compares itself as wood and the soul as an architect, i.e. the soul makes of the body what it wants. Pragmatically, this RQ has multiple functions; it has the illocutionary force of complaint, accusation, and self-defence. The body complains against the 112
soul. Its complaint bears two other speech acts; the body through its complaint accuses the soul by stating that the soul obliges the body to do what it desires. The body also accuses the soul of any sin it commits in that it originates from the soul. So, the soul is responsible. At the same time, the body frees itself from the committed sin by stating that only the soul has the wit and authority while it is like a tree. The reasons behind using RQs instead of DSAs can be due to the following reasons: a) The soul uses RQs because it knows that there is a magical power (God) that seats the soul in the body. So, this power has authority upon both of them. The soul believes that this power hears their speech. b) The body uses RQs because the body itself states that it does not have authority upon the soul and it is like a piece of wood. c) The first two RQs are farfetched; the soul and body show the hopeless of liberty from each other and their join will be forever in this world, i.e. they cannot separate from each other without death. d) Every RQ bears more than one illocutionary force such as the fourth RQ whereas by using DSAs they cannot be performed. The above discussion of RQs in Marvell's "A Dialogue between the soul and Body" can be summarized in the following table:
113
O who shall, from this
Question
biased
Wh-
Negatively
Dungeon raise / A Soul insalv'd
so
_
SNPI
_
terms of ISAs
Negatively
WNPI
Functions of RQ in
Wh-
of NPIs
1-2
Orientation
Types of RQ
1.
Line No.
RQ
Types
Serious of No.
Table (8) RQs used in Marvell's "A Dialogue between the Soul and Body"
Complaining
and
negative assertion
many
wayes?
2.
Oh who shall me deliver whole
/
11-12
_
_
Question
From
Complaining and accusation
Biased
bonds of this Tyrannic Soul?
3.
What Magick could me thus confine
21-22
/Within
Wh-
Positively
Question
biased
_
_
What but a Soul could have the wit /To build
assertion
41-42
Wh-
Positively
Question
biased
_
_
Complaining, accusation ,and self-defence
me up for Sin so fit?
Total
and
affirmative
anothers Grief to pine?
4.
Complaining
4WhQuestions
2Positively biased 2Negatively biased
0WNPI
0SNPI
1Affirmative assertion 1Negative assertion 1Self-defence 2Acusations 4Complaining
114
4.4.3 Marvell's "The Fair Singer" This poem describes the speaker's acknowledgement about his defeat before the charms of a woman. Love is the theme of the poem. It consists of three six-line stanzas. In the first stanza, the speaker states his collapse and defeat before a woman who possesses two kinds of beauty which combine together to defeat him. She has a lovely look, specifically her eyes and hair; also, she has a sweet voice. Her eyes bind his heart and her sweet voice enslaves his mind. The speaker likens the beloved woman as a "sweet enemy"(Lall, 2007: 114-15). In the second stanza, the speaker states that he could have escaped from the woman if she had possessed only one kind of beauty rather than two kinds. Whereas she has the cunning art which enables to fetter him in all ways, so how can he avoid being her slave? In the third stanza, the speaker feels that to fight a battle on the ground against a woman is easier because in that situation the chance of victory will be equal for both competitors. While, in present case all his resistance against her is fruitless, because she has two opportunities for success. So, all his power of resistance is defeated because she gains both the wind and sun, just like an army commander is certain to be defeated in a battle if his opponent has the means of the wind behind him or the means of the sun at his back (ibid: 116-19) . As a researcher I see that love in this poem is not mutual love but rather it is one- sided love or just admiration. In both types the couple do not feel relaxed particularly the one who experiences one- sided love or admires the other which damages the doer. Through the poem, a man loves or admires a woman who has two attractive devices; nice eyes and voice. The voice may refer to nice voice naturally which is a gift from God or artificial sound in speaking when some 115
women intentionally make their sound soft. Both nice eyes and voice easily affect the other especially who are weak in front of the opponent gender. The speaker states his collapse and defeat which is the weak point of two people who have fallen in love. The wise person must balance between his/her weakness and strength, or his/her emotion and mind. Biasness towards any of the two leads to producing non- mutual and unwelcomed love. As a result, one of them dominates and requires authority over the other. This will seem as a means of torturing the other. At the same time, the other one is like a slave or prisoner who does not relax with this love and show disability towards changing the present situation. This can be seen in this poem when the speaker describes the beloved woman as a sweet enemy. (See No.3 "C"line, 2). Below is the RQ which is occurred in the poem: But how should I avoid to be her Slave, Whose subtile Art invisibly can wreath My Fetters of the very Air I breath?
(Lines, 1o-12)
The modernized spelling of words 'subtile', 'breath', and ' wreath' are subtle, breathe, and wreathe. It is worth noting that these words (breath, wreath) are still using as their spelling in a noun position while in verb position their spelling are changed to (breathe and wreathe). From semantic perspective, this positive RQ is equivalent to a negative assertion. It means but how it is possible for him to escape from the attractive charms of the woman who is enslaved by her subtle art that can secretly fetter him with chains from all the sides. In other words, he cannot rescue himself from the woman's charms. From Pragmatic perspective, this RQ has illocutionary force of denying and declaration as well. The speaker, through this denial question, implicitly negates his save from the woman's slavery. In other words, it is impossible for him to be free from the 116
woman's fetters. Through the speaker's negation; declaration about his defeat and collapse before the woman appears. The speaker declares his defeat before the woman who has two beauties which are really magical means to draw the opponent gender. Above all, the speaker acknowledges his disability and impatience when someone gets this belief, it is too far to resist any more and decide as a free one. What is the proposition behind preferring this RQ instead of DSA? It can be argued that this RQ is used as a denial question with which impossibility and disappointment of being free are shown while by negating via DSA, these two characteristics cannot be shown.
1.
But how should I avoid to be her Slave, Whose subtile invisibly can wreath
10-12
Yes-
No
Negatively
Question
biased
1Yes- No Question
1Negatively
SNPI
_
_
in terms of ISAs
WNPI
Functions of RQ
NPIs
of
Types Orientation
Types of RQ
Line No.
RQ
Series of No.
Table (9) RQ used in Marvell's "The Fair Singer"
Denying
and
Declaration
Art
My Fetters of the very Air I breath?
Total
biased
0WNPI
0SNPI
1Denying 1Declaration
117
4.5 General Discussions of the Results 4.5.1 John Donne's Poems Donne's "Break of Day" is about non- mutual love. The poem shows disagreement and dissatisfaction with this sort of love in some ways like command, negative assertion, rejecting, reproach, and reminding. These are all expressed by using RQs by the speaker who is a woman. It is clear that indirectness is preferred by women to avoid roughness. The matter is very sensitive because the woman wants the man to stay with her even in day not just at night. RQ is also preferred to express disagreement but in a manner to save both faces. As well as, reminding is usually expressed by RQ. Donne's "The Canonization" is about love but as it is known love sometime associates with criticism such as in this poem. Someone criticizes the speaker's love and his beloved love and states that their love does not last long and not innocent. The lovers are not allowed to practice their love because depending on the first line of the poem "For Godsake hold your tongue, and let me love"; it is clear that the criticiser has authority and power above the lovers. That is why, when the speaker defends on his love and rejects the criticism, he uses RQs because they are the best means with which the speaker could show resistance and defend their love to prove that their love is innocent and everlasting but softly. Donne's "The Good-Morrow" is about all types of love: immature, mature, and eternal love. Donne describes his experience with love. In immature love, the lovers behave childishly and unconsciously. Donne reproaches their immature love but with RQs because even Donne doubts and wonders about their behaviour at that time. Whereas, when Donne describes their mature love which is full of agreement and relaxes, even he denies (by RQ) that there were 118
two other suitable couples like them and he is proud of them. Also, when someone wants to show pride of himself; using indirectness is the welcomed way. Therefore, RQs in "The Good-Morrow" are used to express satisfaction and dissatisfaction with love and represent many various functions such as denying, sarcasm, reproach, and pride because RQs are the reasonable means to express these functions. The results of analysing Donne's love poems can be summarised in the following table which shows the frequency and percentage of RQs used in these poems. Table (10) The frequency and percentage of RQs used in Donne's analysed poems Orientation
Types of
F. of RQs
Type of RQ
Functions
NPIs
Wh
Yes-NO
Verb-
Positive
Negative
No Bias
WNPI
SNPI
Type
F %
less
15
F %
F %
F %
F
%
F
%
F %
F %
F %
Persuading
4 16
9 60
6 40
0 0
5
33.
9
60
1 6.
0 0
0 0
Self-defence
4 16
Reproach
3 12
Denying
2 8
Negative assertion Protesting
2 8
Sarcasm
2 8
Affirmative assertion Boasting
1 4
Command
1 4
Rejecting
1 4
Reminding
1 4
Urging
1 4
33
Total functions
66
2 8
1 4
25
119
4.5.2 George Herbert's Poems Herbert's "The Collar" is religious poem. The speaker is the poet himself, he is in struggle with himself. He either works as a priest in the church and restricts himself with some rules and waits the reward at the other world or leaves the church to be free and enjoys with all worldly pleasures. The speaker bothers with his priest's life. He wants to persuade firstly himself and the others that he has the right to leave this serving; he represents his sorrow in affected way. There is a dramatic audience who is God. So when he utters his discontent, he uses RQs as means to express his internal struggle by complaining and protesting because the addressee (God) is not just having authority over the speaker, but he belongs to God. Another reason for using RQ is that every RQ represents more than one function. So, it is more diplomatic and economic. The theme of "Jordan (I)" poem is about poetry. It tries to prove that in addition to religion and love due to their association with these speech acts such as: protesting, self-defending, suggesting, offering, etc. RQs can be used with poetry as a theme due to two influential factors. First, the style of the poet; individual style has its role. Everyone has her/his way for expressing. Some have impressive technique and in a very logical and intelligent way they select the words, time and place and even suit their voice with it, but some others do not care about how, where ,and when they open the matter. Second, the aim and intention of the speaker behind the material; it means what they want to communicate or the functions they want to achieve: rejecting criticism, issuing criticism, command, sarcasm, protesting, complaining, and reproach are innately unwelcomed. So to strengthen the assertion and soften the criticism; RQs are suitable means. The speaker in this poem wants to issue criticism in sarcastic way, suggest, and make command via RQ which is favoured more than DSA. 120
The poem "Love (III)" involves religion and love but at the last stanza in which Love is referred to God. There are three reasons behind preferring RQs. First, it is a dialogue between Love (Lord) and the poet. Second, the type of speech acts which are accusation, denying, reminding, and boasting. Third, the theme of the poem: religion or romantic love. The results of analysing Herbert's poems can be summarised in the following table which shows the frequency and percentage of RQs used in these poems. Table (11) The frequency and percentage of RQs used in Herbert's analysed poems.
F. of RQs
Type of RQ
Wh
Yes-NO
Orientation
Verb-
Positive
Negative
less
15
Polarity
No
Functions
WNPI
SNPI
Type
F %
Bias
F %
F
%
F %
F
%
F
%
F %
F %
F %
Criticism
6 19.354
4
10
66.
1 6.
6
40
9
6
0 0
1 6.
0 0
Complaining
4 12.903
66
66
Sarcasm
4 12.903
Suggestion
4 12.903
persuading
3 9.677
Protesting
3 9.677
command
2 6.451
Reminding
2 6.451
accusation
1 3.225
Boasting
1 3.225
26. 66
66
(pride) Denying Total Functions
1 3.225 31
121
4.5.3 Andrew Marvell's Poems Marvell's "A Dialogue between the Resolved Soul, and Created Pleasure" is about a dialogue between the soul and pleasures and it is an ordinary case. It implies that human beings are always in struggle between selecting worldly pleasure or keep their belief and principles continuously. To teach and analyse the case to his readers/hearers; the poet composes the poem in form of a dialogue. He uses RQs because they are a suitable means by which the questioner can ask and provide the answer in analytic way to persuade the hearers/readers. Also, the types of functions have significant effect. It can be argued that the reasons behind using RQs instead of DSAs can be stated as follows: 1. The RQs in (lines, 55-6, 61-2, and 67-8) which are made by the soul represent refusing to offers. As known, refusing in ISAs will be more polite. The RQ in (line 65-6) which is performed by Pleasure is an offer. Again, this style of performing an offer is more reasonable than DSA to save face. 2. The RQ in (lines, 65-6) has multiple roles. Primarily, it functions as RQ, and secondarily as information asking question, while, these two functions cannot be represented in DSAs. 3. The RQ in (lines, 67-8) functions as an answer to the previous offer the soul expresses its opinion as suggestion in the form of RQ. These two speech acts: refusing and making a suggestion to direct someone to do something may threaten face if they introduce directly. The poem" A Dialogue between the Soul and Body", as the title suggests is about a dialogue between the soul and body. It represents human beings' life in realistic way because human beings always behave as two separate personalities. 122
They sometimes do some actions or utter some utterances then they blame themselves and become regretful. Often, their regret may make them kill themselves. Or sometimes they acknowledge and know that some actions are unreasonable and very harmful but they do it. Through this poem, the poet has made a dramatic dialogue between the soul and body by which each one denotes its problematic case and dissatisfies with the other one. Also, through the poem the authority and position for each one is showed. So the poet has a religious proposition. By using RQs, he addresses some problematic cases and implies the answers in analytic way. The poem "The Fair Singer" is about a man who collapses and defeats in front of a woman who possesses two influential beauties which easily dominate men: attractive eyes and nice or soft voice. This poem includes only one RQ, the most influential reason may refer to the style of the poem which is descriptive not analytical type. The function of the RQ is declaration and denying as well; these two functions are difficult to express directly because the speaker is a man and it is hard to him to declare and acknowledge his defeat in front of a woman directly. The other function is denying; by direct negation he cannot introduce impossibility while by RQ he can. The results of analysing Marvell's poems can be summarised in the following table which shows the frequency and percentage RQs used in these poems.
123
Table (12) The frequency and percentage of RQs used in Marvell's analysed poems. Type of RQ
Orientation
F. of
Types of
Function
NPIs
RQs
Wh
Yes-NO
Verb-
Positive
Negative
less
10
No
WNPI
SNPI
Type
F %
Bias
F %
F %
F %
F
%
F
%
F % F %
F % Complaining
1 4.761
7 70
3 30
0
4
40
6
60
0 0 0 0
0 0 Rejecting
1 4.761
0
Suggestion
1 4.761
Accusation
1 4.76
Affirmative
1 4.761
assertion Declaration
1 4.761
Denying
2 9.523
Negative
2 9.523
assertion
Total Functions
Offer
3 14.285
Promise
4 19.047
Self-defence
4 19.047 21
4.5.4 A Comparison between Donne, Herbert, and Marvell It can be useful to start the comparison between these three poems by considering the following table which shows the frequency and percentage of RQs used by the three poets. 124
Table (13) The frequency and percentage of RQ used by Donne, Herbert, and Marvell. Orientation
Type of
Total
Donne
Function
Polarity NPI
Poets
Name of
Type of RQ
Wh
Yes-NO
Verb-
Positive
negatie
less
No
WNPI
SNPI
Type
F
%
Bias
F
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
Persuading
4
16
15
9
60
6
40
0
0
5
33.
9
60
1
6.
0
0
0
0
Self-defence
4
16
Reproach
3
12
Denying
2
8
Negative assertion Protesting
2
8
2
8
Sarcasm
2
8
Affirmative assertion boasting
1
4
1
4
Command
1
4
Reminding
1
4
Rejecting
1
4
Urging
1
4
Criticism
6
19.354
Complaining
4
12.903
Sarcasm
4
12.903
Suggestion
4
12.903
Persuading
3
9.677
Protesting
3
9.677
Command
2
6.451
Reminding
2
6.451
Accusation
1
3.225
Boasting
1
3.225
Denying
1
3.225
33
66
Total Functions
25
Herbert
15
4
26.
10
66
66.
1
66
6.
6
40
9
60
0
0
1
66
6.
0
0
66
Total Functions Marvell
10
31 7
70
3
30
0
0
4
40
6
60
0
0
0
0
0
0
Complaining
4
19.047
Rejecting
4
19.047
125
Total Functions
Suggestion
3
14.285
Accusation
2
9.523
Affirmative assertion Declaration
2
9.523
1
4.761
Denying
1
4.761
Negative assertion Offer
1
4.761
1
4.761
Promise
1
4.761
Self-defence
1
4.761
21
It is clear from the table that both Donne and Herbert use fifteen RQs for each. On the other hand, Marvell uses only ten RQs. As for orientation, Donne and Herbert share the same number in negatively oriented RQs. Both use nine negatively oriented RQs while Donne uses five positively oriented RQs and one non-bias RQ, but Herbert uses six positively oriented RQs and no non-biased RQ. Similarly, Marvell also seems to be interested in negatively oriented RQs. He uses six negatively oriented RQs while he uses only four positively oriented RQs with no non-biased RQs. As for the functions of RQs, the table shows that the most frequent function of RQs in Donne's poems are persuading and self-defence which are used for four times and represent (16%).On the other hand, the least frequent functions are: affirmative assertion, boasting, command, reminding, rejecting command, and urging each of these functions represents (4%).This high frequency of self-defence and persuading in Donne's poem are due to the theme of the Donne's "The Canonization" poem. Through the poem the speaker uses RQs to defend his and his beloved love as a reaction against the criticism of his love. The aim behind the self-defence is to persuade the addressee about his innocent intention. The speaker reacts in the mild way because the criticiser 126
seems to have authority upon them; also he does not want to disrupt the situation and become worse. The speaker tries to defend on his love by using self-defence strategy. As for Herbert the most frequent function is criticism which is used six times and represents (19.354%).While the next more frequent functions are complaining, sarcasm, and suggestion each of which represents(12.903% ).Again this high frequency of criticism is related to the nature of Herbert's poem" Jordan(I)."He uses RQs for criticizing the style of some other poets and suggesting that their poetry should be more realistic. This criticism has taken the form of sarcasm because they believe that there is no beauty in reality. While Herbert uses RQs for complaining in "The Collar" poem about his state. Finally, the most frequent functions of RQs in Marvell's poems are complaining and rejecting which each presents (19.047%).This high frequency of complaining is due to the theme of Marvell's "A Dialogue between the Soul and Body" poem. Both soul and body complain against each other. While the high frequency of rejection is also related to the theme of Marvell's poem "A Dialogue between the Resolved Soul, and Created Pleasure" who rejects all the offers made to tempt the soul. The soul uses RQs to reject all these tempts and makes nice suggestions within the excuses.
4.5.5 Summary of the Whole Sample of Poems The total frequency and percentage of RQs used in the whole sample of the analysed poems can be summarised in the table below:
127
Table (14) The total frequency and percentage of RQs used in the whole sample. Types of NPIs
Functions
Ppoems
Orientation
F. of RQs from nine
Type of RQ
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
F
%
F %
Complaining
8 10.256
40
20
50
19
47. 5
1
2.5
15
37. 5
24
60
1
2.5
1
2. 5
0 0
Persuading
7 8.974
Suggestion
7 8.974
Criticism
6 7.692
Sarcasm
6 7.692
Protesting
5 6.410
Rejecting
5 6.410
Self-defence
5 6.410
Denying
4 5.128
Accusation
3 3.846
Affirmative assertion Command
3 3.846
Negative assertion Reminding
3 3.846
Reproach Boasting Assurance Declaration Offer
3 2 1 1 1
Promise
1 1.282
Urging
1 1.282
Wh
Yes-NO
Verbless
Positive
Negative
No bias
WNPI
SNPI
Type
F %
Total Functions
3 3.846
3 3.846
76
The above table reveals the following: 1. It is clear that RQs are frequent in the analysed metaphysical poems in which forty RQs are used. This number of frequency indicates that the use of RQ is a characteristic of this sort of poetry due to certain features of it. 128
3.846 2.564 1.282 1.282 1.282
One of the influential features in this sort of poetry is an analytical style, in which a proposition is introduced, then RQ is used as a means to forward a viewpoint and an argument .And then, the proposition is analysed in a logical way to persuade the hearer. This crucial feature requires frequent use of RQs. Consequently, the first hypothesis which states that "Certain features of metaphysical poetry require frequent use of RQs" is verified. 2. All the poems except "Jordan (I)" are about religion or love and there are thirty three frequency of RQs in them. This high frequent of RQs due to the themes of the poems although they are written by different poets. Therefore, RQs seem to be very frequent in metaphysical poems that deal with religion and love. So, the second hypothesis which states that "The theme of the poem influences the use of RQ" is verified. 3. As for orientation, thirty- nine RQs out of forty RQs are negatively or positively biased. The negative orientation of the used RQs is more frequent than positive orientation. The former is used twenty four times representing (60%) while the latter is used for fifteen times representing (37.5%).On the other hand, non-biased RQs are used only for one time representing (2.5%).This great difference between positive and negative orientation on the one hand and non-biased orientation on the other hand shows that the majority of RQs used in metaphysical poetry do not act as OQs on the semantic level. 4. As for functions, these high frequent functions behind the employed RQs indicate that semantically the used RQs do not act as OQs but rather as assertions because the majority of the employed RQs are used to satisfy pragmatic functions which are stated in table (14 p.128).Based on this point in the third hypothesis which states that "Metaphysical poets use RQ 129
for certain pragmatic purposes that cannot be attained by other types of questions" is accepted. 5. Individual differences between the three poets are clear: Donne and Herbert use fifteen RQs for each, while Marvel only uses ten RQs. The same individual differences between the three poets can be found in terms of orientation and the functions of RQs. Therefore, the fourth hypothesis which states that "Individual differences can be found between metaphysical poets in terms of the frequency and purposes of using RQ" is also confirmed. 6. The most frequent function of the employed RQ is complaining which is used eight times and represents(10.256%).This high frequency due to the addressees status for example in "the Collar" Herbert uses RQs to complain about his life in the church while addressing God because his service is for sake of God. 7. Through the functions of the selected sample, it can be concluded that RQs involve all the types of speech acts, for example, assertives speech acts as (affirmative assertion, negative assertion, assurance, denying, reminding, suggesting, Commissives
accusation, speech
reproach,
acts
such
criticism, as
complaining,
(assurance,
promise,
and
boast).
offer,
and
refusing).Directive speech acts like (command, suggestion, persuading, and urging). Declarative speech acts as (declaration).Expressive speech acts as (complaining, protest, and boast). 8. Throughout all the nine poems, it can be seen that first, the two prominent themes (love and religion) have influence of using RQs because of their associations. They mostly associate with criticism, self-defence, complaining, commanding, reminding, blaming, suggesting, etc. So, RQs are frequently used 130
for many pragmatic functions such as: complaining, persuasion, suggestion, etc. Second, RQs are widely (containing 60 lines out of 289) used by all the selected metaphysical poets. These two points can be seen as brief answers to all the research questions.
4.6 Findings The Analysis of the selected poems mentioned in the previous sections (4.5.4 and 4.5.5 with tables 13 and 14) reveal the following findings: 1. RQs are frequently used in the selected metaphysical poems. The three poets have used forty RQs. 2. Both wh-questions and yes-no questions are almost equally used. The former type is used twenty times representing (50%) of the total number of the RQs used in the selected samples. The latter type is used nineteen times representing (47.5%) of the total number. While verbless RQs are rarely used in the selected samples; they are only used once representing (2.5%) of the total number. 3. Non-biased RQs are rarely used in the selected samples; they are used only once. Most of the RQs are either positively or negatively oriented. The former is used fifteen times representing (37.5%) while the latter is used twenty four times representing (60%) of the total number of the employed RQS. 4. The results have shown that the most frequent function is complaining for eight times is used representing (10.256%) of the used RQs. The next most frequent functions are persuading and suggestion each
represents
(8.974%), criticism, sarcasm each represents(7.692%), protesting, rejecting, self-defence each represents (6.410%), denying (5.128%), accusation,
affirmative
assertion,
negative
assertion,
command, 131
reminding,
reproach
each
represents(3.846%),
and
boasting
represents(2.564%) respectively. The least frequent functions are assurance, declaration, offer, promise, and urging each of these functions is only once used and represents (1.282%) of the total number of the used RQs. 5. Throughout the forty RQs used; WNPI is used only once which represents (2.5 %), while SNPI is not used because it is mainly used in ordinary speech.
132
Chapter Five Conclusions and Suggestions for Further Studies 5.1Conclusions Within its scope and the procedure followed, the findings of the study lead to the following conclusions: 1. The use of RQs is a characteristic feature of metaphysical poetry due to the high frequency of RQs in this sort of poetry. In other words, RQ is widely used; this goes with what has been hypothesized (Hypothesis No.1). This conclusion also represents an answer to the first research question which states" To what extent is the use of RQ frequent in metaphysical poetry?" 2. The theme of a poem influences the use of RQs in terms of frequency and function. RQs are frequent in religious and love poems; again, this verifies to a great extent the second hypothesis. At the same time, this conclusion will be an answer to the second research question which states "Does the theme of the poem influence the frequency of RQ in metaphysical poetry?" 3. Semantically, RQs in metaphysical poetry mainly act as assertions with various pragmatic functions; this goes with what has been hypothesized (Hypothesis No.3). See (table 13 p.125) 4. The uses of RQs differ due to individual differences, and that is evident in the poetry of Donne and Herbert in particular. This again verifies the fourth hypothesis of the current study.
133
5. RQs in metaphysical poetry are used for various functions. The most frequent function is complaining, while the least frequent functions are assurance, declaration, offer, promise, and urging as it is shown in (table 14 p.128). This result will be a suitable answer to the third research question. 6. All of the selected metaphysical poets employ RQs. So the use of RQ is not determined by individual style of the poets. This answers the fourth research question which states "Do all metaphysical poets employ RQ, or it is determined by individualistic style?" 7. RQs in metaphysical poetry are mainly positively or negatively oriented. Non-biased RQs are rarely used in metaphysical poetry. So, semantically RQs do not function or communicate as OQs. (See table 14p.128 ) 8. Context has a dominant position to distinguish RQs from other type of questions and indicating their functions. Similarly, the semantics of the sentence has an effect on understanding the meaning/answer to an RQ. 9. Individual style of the poet has a blatantly role, for example, the poem "Jordan (I) is neither about religion nor love but it is about poetry. However, it includes seven RQs. This leads to the fact that the style of the poet and his view about interaction with others in the world also has crucial effect. (See 4.3.2). 10. RQs can function as a challenge for both the speaker and listener. The speaker can illustrate what s/he disagrees with under the cover of question form. At the same time, RQs can give the hearer a chance of challenge and resistance by rejecting, self-defence, etc. 11.The function of RQs also affects their use; some speech acts are innately face threatening such as: command, rejecting, reproach, protesting, and criticism. RQs are a suitable means by which the speakers can strengthen their assertions and soften criticisms. Reminding is a speech act which can 134
always be uttered by RQs. Denying speech act is another function which can be performed by RQs because by negating with DSAs the speaker cannot represent impossibility and defying. Also, stating pride with ISA is more welcomed than DSA.
5.2 Suggestions for Further Studies The following topics can be suggested for promoting further studies in this field of inquiry: 1. Carrying out contrastive studies of English and Kurdish RQs in some other literary genres like modern British/American poetry, novel, drama, etc. 2. Investigating RQs in some other registers like political speech, advertisements, etc. 3. Investigating RQs with reference to Grice's Maxims, politeness theory and politeness principles, etc. 4. Studying RQs in English - Kurdish written translation.
135
المستخلص االسئٍخ اٌجالغ١خ رشىً خزءا اسبس١بʺ ِنٓ اسنزؼّبٌٕب اٌ١ن ٌٍ ِٝٛنخا ٚثنبٌشغُ ِنٓ اال٘زّنبَ اٌّززا٠نذ اٌنز١ٌٛ٠ ٜنخ اٌجبحثٌٙ ْٛزٖ اٌظب٘شح فِ ٝخزٍف اٌّدبالد رجمٕ٘ ٝبن حبخخ ٌّبسخ ٌجحثٙب فنٌّ ٝدنبالد ِؼٕ١نخ غ١نش ِجح ٛنخ ػٍ ٝااللً ف ٝخبِؼبد وشدسزبْ ِٓٚ ,ثٕٙ١ب اٌشؼش اٌّ١زبف١ز٠مٝا ٚرزؼٍك ثؼض ِٓ ٘زٖ االسئٍخ ثّذ ٜاسزخذاَ االسئٍخ اٌجالغ١خ ٚٚظبئف ٘زا إٌٛع ِٓ اٌشؼشا اِب االسئٍخ االخش ٜفززؼٍك ثزب ١ش ِٛضنٛع اٌمين١ذح ٚاسنٍٛة اٌشبػش ػٍ ٝاسزخذاَ االسئٍخ اٌجالغ١خا ٚرّثً ٘نزٖ االسنئٍخ فدنٛح رز ٍنت اخٛثنخ ٚاضنحخا ٌنزا ٠ؼنذ ٘نزا اٌجحن ِحبٌٚخ ٌالخبثخ ػٍ٘ ٝزٖ االسئٍخا ٚرفزننشا اٌذساسننخ اْ االسننئٍخ اٌجالغ١ننخ ِىننزخذِخ فنن ٝاٌشننؼش اٌّ١زننبف١ز٠م ٟثشننىً ِزىننشس ٚالغننشاا رذا١ٌٚننخ ِخزٍفخ ,وّب رفزشا اٌذساسخ اْ ِٛضٛع اٌمي١ذح ٚاسٍٛة اٌشنبػش ٌّٙنب ا نش ػٍن ٝاسنزخذاَ االسنئٍخ اٌجالغ١نخ ف٘ ٟزا إٌٛع ِٓ اٌشؼش ا ٌٚشا رحم١ك ا٘ذاف اٌذساسخ ٚاٌزحمك ِٓ صذق فشض١برٙب رُ ارجبع ٔٛػ ِٓ ٓ١االخشاءاد ,احذّ٘ب ٔظنشٞ ٚاالخننش ػٍّننٟا ٚرزّثننً االخننشاءاد إٌظش٠ننخ ثجٕننبء انننبس ٔظننش ٞحننٛي االس نئٍخ اٌجالغ١ننخ ٚ ,رؼش٠ننف االسننئٍخ اٌجالغ١خ ٚٚظبئفٙب ٚريٕ١فٙبا وّب ٚرُ ثٕبء اننبس ٔظنش ٞاخنش حنٛي اٌشنؼش اٌّ١زنبف١ز٠م٠ ٟزضنّٓ اٌخينبئ اٌّّ١زح ٌٙزا إٌٛع ِٓ اٌشؼش ِٛٚضٛػبرٗ ٚوزٌه اُ٘ اٌشؼشاء اٌز ٓ٠وزجٛا فٗ١ا ٚاِب االخشاءاد اٌؼٍّ١خ فززّثنً ثبخز١نبس ػٕ١نخ ِىٔٛنخ ِنٓ رىنغ لينبئذ ٌثال نخ رنؼشاء ِ١زنبف١ز٠م٘ ٓ١١نُ خنْٛ د ,ْٚٚخٛسج ٘بسثشدٚ ,أذسِ ٚبسفًا ٚرُ رحٍ ً١االسئٍخ اٌجالغ١خ اٌّىزخذِخ ف٘ ٟزٖ اٌميبئذ ِٓ إٌنبح١زٓ١ اٌذالٌ١خ ٚاٌزذا١ٌٚخ ٚفك ٌّٕٛرج رُ رجٌٕٙ ٗ١نزا اٌ نشاا ٚاظٙنشد ٔزنبئح اٌزحٍ١نً اْ االسنئٍخ اٌجالغ١نخ ِىنزخذِخ ثشىً ٚاسغ فن ٝاٌشنؼش اٌّ١زنبف١ز٠مٚ ٟالغنشاا رذا١ٌٚنخ ِخزٍفنخا وّنب اظٙنشد إٌزنبئح ا نش ِٛضنٛع اٌمين١ذح ٚاسٍٛة اٌشبػش ػٍ ٝاسزخذاَ اال سئٍخ اٌجالغ١خ ف٘ ٟزا إٌٛع ِٓ اٌشؼشا ٚٚفمبʺ ٌٙزٖ إٌزبئح فمذ جزذ صحخ اٌفشض١بد اٌز ٟرجٕب٘ب اٌجح ا
حکومة اقلیم کردستان وزارة التعلیم العالی و البحث العلمی جامعة السلیمانیة فاکلتی العلوم األنسانیة سکول اللغات
دراسة داللية – تداولية يف االسئلة البالغية يف قصائد انكليزية ميتافيزيقية منتقاة
رسالة مقدمة الی مجلس سکول اللغات /فاکلتی العلوم األنسانیة فی جامعة السلیمانیة کجزء من متطلبات نیل درجة الماجستیر فی اللغة األنکلیزیة و علم اللغة تقدمت بها ژال محمد امین سعید که َ بإشراف ا .م .د .اياد حميد محمود
5102م
0341هـ
5102ك
ثوختة ثسضيازى زِةوانبيَرى بةشيَكى ضةزةكى شماى ثيَك دةييَهيَت لةبةكازييهانى زِوَذانةماندا ،كة لةوانةية زِؤذيك تيَهةثةزِيَت بةضةزماندا بةبىَ دةزِبسِيو ياى طويَ ليَبووى لةم جؤزة ثسضيازة .ضةزةزِاي شؤزبووني ضةزجني تويَرةزاى لةضةز ئةم ديازدةية لة ضةنديو بوازي جياواشدا ،كةضي ييَشتا ثيَويطتيةكى شؤز بة تويَريهةوة يةية لةديازدةى ثسضيازى زِةوانبيرى لةبوازةجياجياكاندا كة تويَريهةوةياى لةبازةوة نةكساوة بةاليةنى كةمةوة لةشانكؤكانى كوزدضتاندا .يةنديَك لةم ثسضيازانة كة ثةيوةضنت بة مةوداى بةكازييَهانى ثسضيازى زِةوانبيَرييةوةوة و دةزخطتهى لةم جؤزة يؤنساوةيةدا ،بةآلم ثسضيازةكانى تس بةضرتاونةتةوة بةكازيطةزيى ناوةزِؤكى يؤنساوةكةو شيَواشى شاعريةكاى خؤياى لةضةز بةكازييَهانى ثسضيازى زِةوانبيَريى. ئةم جؤزة ثسضيازانة ثيَويطتيياى بة وةآلميَكى زِووى يةية .لةبةز ئةوة ئاماجني ئةم تويريهةوةية وةآلمدانةوةى ئةم جؤزة ثسضيازانةية. ئةم تويَريهةوةية طسميانةي ئةوة دةكات كة ثسضيازى زِةوانبيَريي لة يؤنساوةي ميتافيصيكيدا بة شيَوةيةكي دووبازة بؤ مةبةضيت ثسِاطماتيكي جياواش بةكازديَت و يةزوةيا لةم وانةيةدا ناوةزِوَكى يؤنساوةكةو شيَواشى شاعريةكاى كازيطةزى دةبيَت لةضةز بةكازييَهانى ثسضيازى زِةوانبيَرى لةم جؤزة يؤنساوةيةدا. بؤ بةدةضتًيَهاني ئاماجني تويَريهةوةكة و ثشرتِاضتكسدنةوةي طسميانةكاني ،دوو جؤزشيَواشي كازكسدى طرياونةتةبةز :تيَؤزى و كسدازي .بةشة تييَوزييةكة لة خطتهةزِووي ضوازضيَوةيةكي تيؤزيي لةضةز ثسضيازي زِةوانبيَريي كة ثيَهاضة ،ثؤلَيَهكسدى ،كاز ... ،يتد لةخؤدةطسيَت ،ثيَكديَت .يةزوةيا ضواز ضيَوةيةكى تس بؤ يؤنساوةي ميتافيصيكي،كة تايبةمتةنديية ديازةكاني ،بابةتةكاني و شاعرية طةوزةكاني يؤنساوةي ميتافيصيكي خساونةتةزِوو. بةشة كسدازييةكة لة نؤ منونةي يةلَبريَسدزاوي ضيَ شاعريي ميتافيصيكيي ناضساو وةك :جؤى دةى ،جؤزج ييَسبَريت ،ئةندزو مازظنَ ثيَكديَت .لةم شيعسانةدا ،بةكازييَهاني ثسضيازي زِةوانبيَريي لة زِووي واتايي و ثساطماتيكييةوة بة ثالَجشت بة ثةيسِةوكسدني مؤديَميَكي كؤكساوة زِاظةكساوى.
دةزئةجنامةكاني زِاظةكسدنةكة ئةوة دةزدةخةى كة ثسضيازى زِةوانبيَريى بؤ ضةند مةبةضتيَكي ثساطماتيكيي ديازيكساو ،بة شيَوةيةكى فساواى لة يؤنساوةى ميتافيصيكى بةكازياتووة .يةزوةيا تويَريهةوةكة كازيطةزيي ناوةزِؤكى يؤنساوةكة و شيَواشى شاعريةكاى لة ضةز بةكازييَهانى ثسضيازى زِةوانبيَرى لةم جؤزة يؤنساوةيةدا ،دةخاتةزِوو .بةم ثيَيةش ،طسميانةكاني تويَريهةوةكة ثشرتِاضتكساونةتةوة. خوا ياوةزى يةموواليةك بيَت
حكومةتى هةزيَنى كوزدضتان وةشازةتى خويَندنى بالَا و تويَرينةوةى شانطتى شانكؤى ضميَنانى فاكةلَتى شانطتة مسؤظايةتييةكان ضكولَى شمان /بةشى شمانى ئينطميصى
ليَكوَلَينةوةيةكي ضينانتيكي-ثساطناتيكيي ثسضيازة زِة وانبيَرييةكان لة شيعسي ميتافيصيكيى ئينطميصيي هةلَبريَسدزاودا یهکهخوێندکار نامه
كةذالَ حمند امني ضعيد ثيَشكةشي ئةجنومةنى ضكولَى شمان /فاكةلَتى شانطتة مسؤظايةتييةكان لة شانكؤى ضميَنانى كسدووة وةك بةشيَك لة ثيَداويطتييةكانى بةدةضتويَنانى ثمةى ماضتةز لة شمانى ئينطميصى و شانطتى شماندا.
بةضةزثةزشيت ث.ى.د .ئةياد حةميد مةمحود
2015شايينى
1436كؤضى
2715كوزدى
