|
|||||||||||||||||||||
From lapidary remarks of the main character the role portrait of the young officer-lieutenant who wants to show that he is handling the situation corresponds to the image of the skilled commander. The story-teller neutrally makes comments in the whole text only six times: Alexey asked, repeated, told, shouted. In all other cases author's comments and their expression include expressive and emotional characteristics of voice (tone, timbre, rate), nonverbal details (emotions, gestures and mimic) and general impression from the speech. The storyteller’s comments don't confirm Alexey's mission, they represent his inner world: lost, uncomprehending, doubting in tactics of military operations. The amount of storyteller’s comments considerably exceeds the amount of direct speech. This disproportion shows motivations of speech behavior of the character. Comments are differently correlated with direct speech of Yastrebov, but in all cases they explain the character’s speech behavior and also his image. The storyteller often fixes voice force, timbre, Alexey's tempo of speech and connects them with his emotional and mental condition: «он громко и весело крикнул» («he shouted loudly and cheerfully»), «задохнувшись, визгливо выкрикнул за два приема» («having choked, he cried out in two shrills») «он крикнул исступленно, с непонятной обидой и злостью ко всему тому, над чем только что чуть не плакал» («he shouted frenziedly, with sadness and rage toward everything that had nearly made him cry»). There are notes in which the storyteller specifies the imitating character of speech of the young lieutenant who imitates his teachers and seniors. For example, dialogue with the friend begins with such a remark: «- И пуля попэ-эрла по каналу ствола! - остановившись у порога, сказал Алексей, подражая преподавателю внутренней баллистики в училище майору Сучку. Они несколько минут хохотали, не сходясь еще, мимикой и жестами копируя движения и походку чудаковатого майора» (2, p. 412). It is, of course, inappropriate in an approaching tragically fighting situation, but young lieutenants are still full of memoirs about their studies in peacetime. It is possible to name other notes complex or combined. They include all elements connected with a speech situation: voice coloring, comparative constructions, special epithets and pantomimes. The paramount role is played by the voice characteristic, and after nonverbal components join . In the article «Language of emotions of M.A. Sholokhov’s and F.D. Krukov’s characters » A.A. Fomushkin writes about a role of nonverbal elements in a speech portrait: «Completed psychological criterion of characters behavior are expressive movements (mimicry, bearing, gestures, gait)» (5, p. 58). Then these notes-comments strengthen impression of the speech. We will result examples of correlation of a voice with paraverbal comments. Voice and nonverbal components |
Examples |
Voice and gestures |
«Алексей никак не мог ухватить сплюснутый мундштук папиросы, и тогда капитан спросил еще:- Курсанты все слышали?- Все, - сказал Алексей. - Генерал-майор...» (2, p.419) |
Voice and mimicry |
«негромко сказал Алексей, с какой-то обновленной преданностью глядя в глаза Рюмина» (2, p.419), «морщась, сказал Алексей» (2, p.421) |
Voice and pantomimes |
«Не сходя с места, Алексей, крикнул через плечо» (2, p.418), «строго сказал Алексей и зачем-то загородил собой нишу» (2, p.422),«Алексей пропустил пленных, пытаясь заглянуть в лицо каждому, и, пристроясь к курсантам, спросил на бегу у того, что отсчитывал шаг: - Куда вы их?» (2, p.443). |
|
In the tragical story of Vorobyov the important role is played by a psychological function of a speech discourse. The speech behavior of the character shows his inner world, thoughts and feelings. Alexey's feelings combine inconsistent conditions: fear, despair and call of duty.
The esthetics of Vorobyov’s style is shown in selection of special characteristics for the description of Alexey’s speech in the culminating moments. The first example is connected with an outcome, a final episode. After the battle, bombardment from all company of the Kremlin cadets there is only one person who stays alive - Alexey. He stands near a tomb and the tank moves towards him. The lieutenant manages to blast the tank, and it by miracle remains live. «Подавленный всем этим, он шел и то и дело всхлипывающее шептал: - Стерва… Худая… Так было легче идти» (2, p. 464) and before«- Стерва, - вяло, всхлипывающее сказал Алексей. – Худая» (2, p. 463). This repeating comment accompanies two-forked dialogue with the tank and with himself. These remarks include abusive lexicon, vernacular, consisting of the truncated syntactic constructions. The word «всхлипывающе» (sobbing) is a characteristic of children's speech testifying psychological slackness of the person, who survived the horrors of the fight. (2, p. 404).
The final episode of the novelette is based on a mythological, matrix plot, all stages of the rite of a passage are visible in it. G. Fraser distinguishes three phases of the rite of a passage: the first phase – a phase of leaving, breaking off all the family relations, the second phase – a symbolical death of the devoted, the third phase – returning, revival in a new capacity (6, p.124).
Vorobyov’s story «Killed at Moscow» however as the majority of stories of military prose, represents initiation text which contains all the phases. The first phase - leaving is described with one phrase with which the story begins: «Учебная рота кремлевских курсантов шла на фронт» («The training company of the Kremlin cadets was heading for the front») (2, p. 404). The basic text of the novelette is a test which the entire company (240 cadets) and captain Ryumin passed there. Two hundred forty people with their captain Ryumin die. And only Alexey Yastrebov survives after all attacks, bombardments and a deadly duel with the tank. This phase of the test is accompanied by additional archetypical images: mentioning a tomb, Alexey's curse words «матери твоей черт» and complicated breath. Alexey falls into the bottom of the tomb, closes his head with hands, tries to take an embryo pose – «lying on one side, having turned knees to a stomach », breathing with deep-chest howl, loses memory and orientation – «he has forgotten everything that has occurred, and doesn’t know where he is». He passes all the stages of death, returning to the womb of the earth what is highlighted by repeating curse words: «пронзительно, но никому не слышно крикнул: - Я тебя, матери твоей черт! Я тебя зараз…», «- Ага, матери твоей черт! Ага!». Using abusive lexicon during such moment is not a casualty: it is something that comes from subconsciousnesssub consciousness, uncontrollable will of the speaking. Such remarks are unexpected, but rather significant, R. Yakobson after V. Hlebnikovym names them «free self-twisted speech» (8, 251).
The phase following death is a phase of revival, transformation: «А затем пришло все сразу - память, ощущение неподатливой тяжести, взрыв испуга, и он с такой силой рванулся из завала, что услышал, как надломленно хрумкнул позвоночник…». Alexey is reborn: jerks from a tomb, howls and sits for a long time being very weakened, his nose is bleeding. After dedication, the character comes back to life in a new status, for Alexey it is shown in fighting armament: «он отрыл бутылку с бензином, СВТ, рюминский пистолет и подолом шинели протер оружие. Винтовки он повесил на плечи - по две на каждом, пистолет спрятал в карман брюк, а бутылку взял в руки». Here the detailed description of the weapon depicts man's phallic symbolics speaking about a successful rite of the passage.
The speech discourse of the main character of the story «Killed at Moscow» consists basically of single remarks or minidialogues. Terms and speech cliches prevail in the lexicon. The main characteristic of syntax is the use of simple sentences which are requests. Interrogative sentences are very common as well. The basic function of Alexey’s speech is emotional which galvanizes into action. External speech is developed through the story. It is connected with the peculiar subject organization which is constructed on a principle of gradual narrowing of a circle of operating characters. Only one person stays alive in the end of the story - Yastrebov. In connection with this fact the character of dialogues changes, they become less authorized, professionalism disappears while vernacular speech becomes common. The final dialogue is a dialogue with an inanimate object – the tank.
The speech discourse studying of the character allows to get an idea about speech portrait which is the compound characteristic of a literary image. When formulating a speech discourse concept of the character we have emphasized both individual, and typological components of the discourse. In A. Bek’s and B. Momyshuly's works in speech discourse presence of authorized dialogues of a great length are prepotent. The paralinguistic comment has an accompanying value. In K. Vorobyov's work a paralinguistic dialogue dominates over the linguistic one in the speech of the character. The role of an authorized dialogue decreases by the end while dialogues-remarks prevail. The external speech of the character, nonverbal dialogues and author's comments-notes have a special value in the story. Alternation of authorized and unauthorized dialogues, division of dialogues by size and addressee, prevalence of terms and speech clichés in the lexicon, presence of undeveloped syntactic constructions in imperative and interrogative forms are characteristic for all three works. The supervision and the allocated criteria can be used in speech behavior studying of characters of other products on the military theme.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Бек А. Волоколамское шоссе. - Киев, "Радянська школа", 1989. – 313 с.
2. Воробьев К.Д. Убиты под Москвой // Военная проза. – М.:АСТ: Астрель, 2006. – 471 с.
3. Вайман С.Т. Драматический диалог. – М., 2003. – 208 с.
4. Момышулы Б. За нами Москва. Записки офицера. – Алма-Ата: «Жазушы», 1970. – 528 с.
5. Фомушкин А.А. Язык эмоций персонажей М.А. Шолохова и Ф.Д. Крюкова // Русская литература. – 1996. - №4. – с. 53-76.
6. Фрэзер Дж. Золотая ветвь: Исследование магии и религии / Пер. с англ. М. К. Рыклина / Пер. с англ. И. Утехина — М.: ТЕРРА-Книжный клуб, 2001. – 528 с.
7. Чернец Л.В. Невербальный диалог в романе Л.Н. Толстого «Анна Каренина» // Проблемы поэтики и стиховедения: Материалы V междунар. науч.-практ. конф. – Алматы: Искандер, 2009. – С. 123-128.
8. Якобсон Р.О. Избранные труды. – М.: Прогресс, 1985. – 353 с.
|
||||||||||||||||||||
© 2024 - KAFU Academic Journal |