Repetition in discourses across languages and genres

1.1 Theoretical framework

Since the subjectivity of discourse depends on discourse participants, intersubjectivity appears to be crucial for mutual understanding and mutual influencing during discourse production. In this connection, the remarks made by Van Dijk are quite symptomatic (2008, 119):

In sum, in this sociocognitive paradigm (and the same is true for a constructionist perspective), there is no such thing as an objective situation, unless I define such objectivity, as I have done for knowledge, as some kind of intersubjective, commonsense definition of the situation, that is, as an understanding shared by the members of a group or community.

In the intersubjective behaviors, repetition is the only instrument for directing the emotional dynamism of subjectivity toward one single way of thinking. The reason is the ability of repetition of the linguistic forms to justify the process of discourse production. During this process, an individual human experience has a specific intellectual power over his/her consciousness. On the other hand, repetition ensures a strategic partnership and mutual agreement during the strong influence of the emotionality of the process of discourse production based on subjectivity and intersubjectivity. Gallagher writes that “[…] intersubjectivity is important for an adequate account of perception” (2008, 163). He further develops this idea referring to the role “of an implicit intersubjectivity built into the perceptual experience” (2008, 171). At the same time, repetition helps to achieve perception, which defines intersubjective acts in discourse. Thus, the context created by intersubjective behaviors can build an impression thanks to the knowledge about semantics and pragmatics of repetition used during discourse production.

Repetition in discourse uses intersubjective behaviors for actualization of what is perceived. It adds an element of subjectivity in the process of concretizing and specifying repetition, resulting in full perception in discourse. Intersubjective behavior creates necessary conditions for cognition during repetition in discourse because it is rich with separate subjective content. Otherwise, subjective behavior will not be able to motivate repetition to play a role in cognitive processes. Intersubjective behavior therefore is one of the general human competencies that cause dynamic changes in the communicative situations during repetition. Since repetition motivates cognitive processes, it can be divided into two types: repetition in mind and repetition in language (Mammadov et al. 2019, 81).

It is obvious that repetition in mind implies reminding. It means that since reminding of the repeated object in different contexts of time and space is characterized by its situational features, the direction of perception is changing in line with the polyphony of consciousness. The polyphonic capacities of consciousness motivate functioning of repetition as an act of mind situationally. That is why repetition is not merely the product of reminding, but also perception of the new situation in line with the logic of time and space changes.

Repetition in language, i.e., direct repetitions of sounds, morphemes, words, phrases and sentences, helps us to find answers to the following two questions: how to perceive and why to perceive during discourse production. The reason is our metaphysic observation of the gestalt principle of mind in the process of perception. Repetitions are linguistic multiplicities, and this multiplicity is accompanied by polyphonic perceptions on the level of consciousness. A linguistic device performs three functions regarding the connection between the real world and cognitive activity: the real world, its linguistic manifestations, and the linguistic reality as a result of the pragmatic attitude of a person to reality. All three functions have a strong link to the stimulus nature of repetition, which predetermines pragmatics and cognition vis-a-vis context.

Phonetic, morphological, lexical, and syntactic repetitions have been traditionally among the most challenging issues in rhetoric (Cockroft et al. 2014, Fahnstock 2011) and stylistics (Simpson 1992). In recent decades, various types of repetitions have also been extensively studied in text linguistics (Halliday and Hasan 1976, Haegemann 1988, Karoly 2003) and discourse studies (Tannen 1989, Hoey 1991, Nascione 2010), which explore them on usage-based methodology (Diessel 2017). This methodology provides an effective tool to study language, its structure, and various linguistic devices belonging to this structure. Moreover, the usage-based methodology can allow the researchers to reveal the functional-pragmatic and cognitive features of language. Since discourse is considered by Semino as “naturally occuring language use: real instances of writing or speech which are produced and interpreted in particular circumstances and for particular purposes” (2008:1), it therefore appears to be an ideal platform for functional-pragmatic and cognitive analysis of various linguistic devices, including repetitions. It therefore appears to be an ideal platform for functional-pragmatic and cognitive analysis of various linguistic devices, including repetitions. The sender of text uses repetitions to deliver his/her pragmatic intention to the receiver of text. On the other hand, these devices have very important cognitive potential. Thus, various structural types of repetitions (phonetic, morphological, lexical, and syntactic) are very important linguistic devices since they are key elements during discourse production.

Obviously, senders of text use different types of repetitions for various purposes in discourse, and therefore, it is difficult to distinguish functions of repetitions in discourse. From a perspective of functional and cognitive richness and potential, phonetic and lexical repetitions have traditionally drawn special attention. Phonetic repetitions, such as alliteration (repetition of initial consonants), play a very important role in text and discourse. There are numerous studies on the poetic and other functions of this type of repetition in literary texts (Jakobson 2010, Roper 2011). Lexical repetitions have also been well-studied from different perspectives (Halliday and Hasan 1976, Hoey 1991, Karoly 2003, etc.). Within text linguistics and discourse analysis, researchers usually analyze the role of lexical repetition as a powerful tool to build cohesion and coherence in text and discourse. Thus, despite these and numerous other studies, the article revisits the role of repetition in discourse focusing on the ways how the combination of phonetic and lexical repetitions functions in literary discourses across languages and genres to produce pragmatic and cognitive effects.

1.2 Methodology and data

Thus, this study is another attempt to explore the role of phonetic and lexical repetitions in the pragmatics and cognition of discourse. For this purpose, the following methods have been used:

1. the method of discourse analysis;

2. the traditional method of contrastive analysis to study the direct repetition of sounds and words from the data.

In order to justify this methodology, the article considers repetition in language as one of the core elements in the series of choices senders make based on their individual and social preferences. It therefore aims to explore phonetic and lexical repetitions extensively used in discourses across genres from a perspective of cognitive-pragmatic approach (MacMahon 2007, Schmidt 2012). The analysis of phonetic and lexical repetitions across languages is a productive way to understand better their pragmatic and cognitive nature. In this connection, literary discourse is ideal since it can help to achieve the objective of the study.

In total, more than 1,500 pages from epic texts, as well as twentieth-century fictional and poetic discourses, have been analyzed. They were selected as a result of intensive selective work with relevant material from Azerbaijani (The Book of Dede Korkut and Movlud Suleymanli’s Three novels), British English (Beowulf and Joanne Rowling’s Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone), and American English (E. Hemingway’s For Whom the Bell Tolls and The Old Man and The Sea). Various types of repetitions are commonly used linguistic devices in the literary texts under analysis, and their analysis has convinced us to formulate a theoretical framework and to write this article. The reason why two epics (Beowulf and The Book of Dede Korkut) have been selected for analysis is that these texts can also be considered as discourse based on its definition “of naturally occurring language use: real instances of writing or speech which are produced and interpreted in particular circumstances and for particular purposes” given by Semino (2008, 1). Despite these two epics belonging to different locations, they are in close proximity in terms of time. It gives an argument to suggest that the participants of these discourses had similar linguistic processes in their consciousness. It can also give us an argument to draw some conclusions about the way of thinking of the people of that time. Thus, the comparative study of the role of phonetic and lexical repetitions in the epic and modern literary discourses can help us understand better the complex nature of repetition both in mind and in language.

1.3 Phonetic repetition

One of the crucial issues in the studies of linguistic pragmatic is the analysis of the role of language in the realization of the pragmatic intention of text. İn this connection, the most intriguing and complex issue is the study of the way how various linguistic devices are used to perform pragmatic functions in discourse. From this perspective, phonetic and lexical repetitions draw a special interest among these devices, since they play a very important role in text pragmatics.

Traditionally, phonetic repetition is considered one of the most productive devices to arouse poetic effect in literary discourse. Recent studies explore this function of phonetic repetitions from the perspective of cognitive pragmatics (Pilkington 2000, MacMahon 2007). One of the most extensively studied types of phonetic repetition is alliteration (repetition of the initial consonant sound). It is common in the various genres of literary texts, especially in the epic texts. Kendall suggests that “Beowulf is a poem of infinite variety. It we cannot know precisely what it may have meant to its original, probably monastic, audience, it certainly speaks to modern audiences in many modes and moods” (1991, 1). Based on these remarks, we can conclude that Beowulf and other epics can be considered as discourses with strong pragmatics and cognition. On the other hand, discourse analysis of old texts can raise questions about the definition of discourse given by Enkvist: “discourse implies text + context,” which contains a situational component (1989, 379). In this connection, the following remarks made by Warwik are interesting (2013, 217):

Likewise in analysing the Old English texts selected for the present study, it was problematic to distinguish between certain unused elements, inferrables and situationally evoked elements. References to priests, churches and other religious and ecclesiastical items could in particularly all cases be assumed as familiar, but it was not possible to determine whether this was because they were part of the assumed background knowledge of the audience of the sermon, or if they were inferrable from elements already familiar on the basis of the preceding discourse, or if they were part of the situational context of the sermon.

It is really hard to reveal the real reasons behind the referential use of lexical repetitions to draw certain conclusions about pragmatic intentions in epic discourses. In any case, the fact of the use of repetitions demonstrates certain pragmatic intentions of the sender. Repetition of the different units of language is the reconstruction of what is in the language in discourse, which means the creativity of the sender. It serves to the delivery of ideas by the author in this context as one of the tools of realization of text pragmatics. In this connection, the repetition of sounds draws special attention. Goering writes (2020, 909):

Line 1122 of Beowulf represents a problem where the findings of metrics, historical phonology, and the reading of the manuscript are in conflict with one another. I revive and adapt Tolkien’s proposal to emend lāðbite līċes līġ ealle forswealg to lāðbite līġes līċ eall forswealg “the cruel bite of fire swallowed up the entire bodies”. This emended reading allows the line to be scanned in accordance with Kaluza’s law without any complications to the standard historical phonology of Old English, and furthermore improves both the syntax and semantics of the overall passage.

The author focuses on the role of repetition of the consonant sound l in line 1122 from Beowulf from the perspective of syntax and semantics in the whole passage. The remarks made by Naciscione explicitly show this role of repetition in the construction of meaning in discourse (2010, 122):

In discourse analysis, another role of repetition is revealed: that of creating relationships and new meaning in a discourse world.

Despite the fact that basically the instances of the use of the repetitions of sounds do not differ from the repetitions of other linguistic units (grammatical and lexical); meantime, they still have some specific features typical to the units of this level. The repetitions of sounds have the same potential and the most important issue here is the innovative way of thinking of the sender reflecting his/her ability to reconstruct meaning goal-orientedly. Abdullayev discusses the instances of the systemic use of repetitions in The Book of Dede Korkut (2017, 206):

The issue of the instances of repetitions in the Book of Dede Korkut as a poetic-stylistic device, especially their primitive literary poetic feature draws a special attention. The repetition of sounds, words, phrases, sentences and even situations is the linguistic-stylistic phenomenon, which has a systemic nature in this epic text.

It is worth noting that phonetic repetitions are typical for epic texts across languages. For example, alliteration is so common in Beowulf that the researchers suggest that this epos was constructed based on this type of repetition (Roper 2011). Especially alliteration is considered an archetype of rhyme by replacing it in the sense of contemporary studies. Thus, another function of alliteration becomes obvious in this epos. The repetition of the initial consonant in the stressed syllabus existed not just as a crucial factor in the construction of epic poetry, but also in the realization of the pragmatic intention of the narrator. The main issue here is the choice of those consonant sounds, which are suitable in terms of alliterative verse and the pragmatics of the text under analysis. In this connection, the following pieces of text from Beowulf are symptomatic:

Heorogar, Hroðgar,

Halga til.

Hyrde ic þæt ides

wæs æþelan cwen,

Heaðo-Scilfingas

healsgebedda.

(Kiernan Kevin, 2015, Electronic Beowulf, Fourth Edition

http://ebeowulf.uky.edu/ebeo4.0/CD/main.html)

Heorogar, Hrothgar, the good Halga,

And a daughter, I have heard who was Onela’s Queen

A balm in bed to the battle-scarred Swede.

(Beowulf, translated by Seamus Heaney, W.W. Norton & Company, 2000)

And:

leoman to leohte

landbuendum.

gefrætwade

foldan sceatas,

leomum leafum,

lif eac gesceop

(Kiernan Kevin, 2015, Electronic Beowulf, Fourth Edition

http://ebeowulf.uky.edu/ebeo4.0/CD/main.html)

To be earth’s lamplight, lanterns for men,

And filled the broad lap of the world

With branches and leaves; and quickened life

(Beowulf, translated by Seamus Heaney, W.W. Norton & Company, 2000)

The analysis of the repetitions of the consonant sounds h and l suggests that an alliterative verse existed in Beowulf as a lingua-poetic device. It made the language of the epos rhythmic and musical, which is so important in terms of text pragmatics. Thus, alliteration performs not only a lingua-poetic function, but also a pragmatic function in this epos. The reason is the richness of the poetic mind of the narrator. The analysis of alliteration in The Book of Dede Korkut suggests that this phenomenon produces the same pragmatic effect in this epos:

Mərə, dini yoq, əqlsiz kafər!

Ussı yoq dərnəksiz kafər!

Qarşu yatan qarlu qara tağlar,

Qarıyıbdır, otı bitməz.

Qanlu-qanlu ırmaqlar

Qurıyıbdur suyı gəlməz.

Şahbaz-şahbaz atlar

Qarıyıbdur qulun verməz.

Qızıl-qızıl dəvələr

Qarıyıbdur köşək verməz.

Mərə kafər, Qazanın. Anası

Qarıyubdur oğul verməz.

(Kitabi – Dədə Qorqud, Bakı Yazıçı 1988, 49)

Godless brainless infidel

Witless disordered infidel!

Yonder snowcapped black mountains have grown old,

No grass grows on them.

The blood-red rivers have grown old,

No water flows in them.

The falcon-swift horses have grown old,

They give no foals.

The red camels have grown old,

They give no young.

Infidel! Kazan’s mother has grown old,

She gives no sons,

(The Book of Dede Korkut, Translated with Introduction and Notes by Jeoffry Lewis, Penguin Books, 1974, 54–55).

Alliteration in this epic text is not a poetic verse such as in Beowulf, but rather a very strong stylistic-pragmatic device. The repetition of the consonant sound Q in this text is in semantic harmony with the word yoq (does not have) used in the first two lines. It refers to the notion lack in the whole piece of this text. In this sense, the hate against the enemy is gradually strengthened by the repetition of the sound Q. By this, the pragmatics of the text is fully realized.

The resemblances of alliteration in these two epic texts give us an argument to suggest that in the early stages of the cultural development of the world population, alliterative verse as a complex mechanism was the main form of the language of any epos, reflecting an internal rhyme and harmony. In the tenth–eleventh centuries, alliterative verse lost its dominance as a device for the construction of poetic texts and a traditional rhyme was introduced and developed. It coincided with the period when The Book of Dede Korkut was recorded in written form (Sumer 1972). Despite the dominance of the rhyme in the epic texts, alliteration was still preserved and used as a stylistic and pragmatic device by the narrators. It reflects a new stage in the development of alliteration as a model of consciousness.

Alliteration used in combination with lexical repetition is one of the most powerful tools in the realization of pragmatic intention in modern literary discourses. Based on the individual properties of the authors, repetitions are constructed and used so creatively that they become central in terms of pragmatics and author’s style. In this connection, the following piece of text from E. Hemingway’s For Whom the Bell Tolls is quite symptomatic:

He lay flat on the brown, pine-needled floor of the forest, his chin on his folded arms, and high overhead the wind blew in the tops of the pine-trees. The mountainside sloped gently where he lay; but below it was steep and he could see the dark of the oiled road winding through the pass. There was a stream alongside the road and far down the pass he saw a mill beside the stream and the falling water of the dam, while in the summer sunlight.

“Is that the mill?” he asked.

“Yes.”

“I do not remember it. It was built since you were here. The old mill is farther down; much below the pass.”

He spread the photostated military map out on the forest floor and looked at it carefully. The old man looked over his shoulder. He was a short and solid old man in a black peasant’s smock and grey iron-stiff trousers and he wore rope-soled shoes. He was breathing heavily from the climb and his hand rested on one of the two heavy packs they had been carrying (For Whom the Bell Tolls, Ernest Hemingway, Triad/Panther Books, 1976, 1).

This example illuminates how the author uses alliteration and lexical repetition to produce a pragmatic effect. In this connection, the consonant sound H + the repetition of he and his frequently used in this piece of fictional text are key. E. Hemingway used them at the beginning of his novel before introducing their names to the reader. Probably he tried to use phonetic and lexical repetitions to draw the attention of the reader to the main characters of the novel with an element of secrecy, which always motivates curiosity. In this connection, the reader is looking for the answers to his/her questions and therefore follows the development of the plot. At a certain point, the author decides to reveal the name of his main character. The same is true in this piece of fictional text from J.F. Rowling’s Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone:

Mr. and Mrs. Dursley, of number four, Privet Drive, were proud to say that they were perfectly normal, thank you very much. They were the last people you’d expect to be involved in anything strange or mysterious, because they just didn’t hold with such nonsense.

Mr. Dursley was the director of a firm called Grunnings, which made drills. He was a big beefy man with hardly any neck, although he did have a very large mustache. Mrs. Dursley was thin and blonde and had nearly twice the usual amount of neck, which came in very useful as she spent so much of her time craning over garden fences, spying on the neighbors. The Dursleys had a small boy called Dudley and in their opinion there was no finer boy anywhere.

The Dursleys had everything they wanted, but they also had a secret and their greatest fear was that somebody would discover it. They didn’t think they could bear it if anyone found out about the Potters. Mrs. Potter was Mrs. Dursley’s sister, but they hadn’t met for several years; in fact, Mrs. Dursley pretended she didn’t have a sister, because her sister and her good-for-nothing husband were as unDursleyish as it was possible to be. The Dursleys shuddered to think what would the neighbors say if the Potters arrive in the street. The Dursleys knew that the Potters had a small son, too, but they had never ever seen him. This boy was another good reason for keeping the Potters away, they didn’t want Dudley mixing with a child like that.

When Mr. and Mrs. Dursley woke up on the dull, gray Tuesday, our story starts, there was nothing about the cloudy sky outside to suggest that strange and mysterious things would soon be happening all over the country. Mrs. Dursley hummed as he picked out his most boring tie for work, and Mrs. Dursley gossiped away happily as she wrestled a screaming Dudley into his high chair (Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone, J.F. Rowling, Bloomsbury, 1997, 1–2).

At the beginning of her story, the author uses alliteration (the repetition of the initial consonant sound D and later P) in combination with the direct repetition of the words Dursley, Dudley and Potter as a powerful instrument to introduce the main characters. These two types of repetitions used in the first two pages of the novel have strong pragmatic potential.