Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Language and Literature
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Martindale, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Deformation forms the course of literary history

Colin Martindale

University of Maine, USA, cmartin61{at}cox.net

The Russian Formalists and Czech Structuralists argued that foregrounding devices such as deformation and deautomatization are central to literature. They saw that such devices build a pressure for novelty into literature. Literature must change constantly because readers gradually become used to and bored with initially novel and interesting deformations. Formalist and Structuralist theorists saw that literature should change but could not explain the direction in which it would change. They hypothesized that the direction of change is determined by extra-literary sociocultural forces. I argue that this hypothesis may be wrong. If we examine the way in which people think of novel word combinations in the first place, we can formulate a theory that explains the direction of literary change. Production of novelty often involves movement away from ordinary waking consciousness toward an altered state of consciousness. Within the confines of a given style, to produce something even more novel, poets must regress to an even more altered state of consciousness. The state of mind in which a poem is produced to some extent determines the words used in the poem. Given that the pressure for novelty is always present whereas other forces acting upon poets vary, we can predict the direction in which poetry tends to move from the alterations in consciousness required to produce ever more novel poetry. Statistical analyses of several poetic traditions show that this is, indeed, the main direction in which poetry evolves.

Key Words: Czech Structuralism • deautomatization • foregrounding • novelty • Russian Formalism

Language and Literature, Vol. 16, No. 2, 141-153 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0963947007075981


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Language and LiteratureHome page
P. Stockwell
Review Article: The year's work in stylistics 2007
Language and Literature, November 1, 2008; 17(4): 351 - 363.
[PDF]