Sunday, 30 March 2014

paper 7 I.A.Richards Figurative Language



Name: Solanki Binita M.
Roll No: 05.
Paper No: 07.
Subject: Literary Theory & Criticism.
Topic: I.A.Richard’s Figurative Language.
Submitted to: Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University. 



Introduction:
                  I.A.Richards was an influential English literary critic and rhetorical. Richards is regularly considered one of the contemporary study of literature in English. Richards life and influence can be divided into period, which correspond roughly to his intellectual interest. Richards is often labeled as the father of the “new criticism”, largely because of the influence of his first two books of critical theory. I.A.Richards is at one with the new criticism in his stress on close textual and verbal stud of a poem.
                     According to Richards there are three objective to write, ‘The Practical criticism’.
·     To introduce a new kind of documentation.
·     To provide new Technique.
·     To prepare the why for educational method.
 In  his methodology, a lot of importance is given to the “words”. Richards provide the theoretical foundations on which the technique of verbal was built.

                  According to I.A.Richards language can be used in two ways, i.c. the scientific use and the emotive one. Two uses of Language shows the scientific way is precise, clear and matter of fact, but in poetry, one can make use of fiction and the author says that truth in a work of art means only the internal necessity or rightness of the work of art.
                     According to him the poets writes to communicate, and language is the means of that communication language is made of words and hence a study of words is all important it the meaning of work of art is understood.
Aim:
                     Richards says “I have set three aims before me in constructing this book.” And then says that “First, to introduce a new kind of documentation to those who are interested in the contemporary state of culture whether as critics, philosophers, as teacher as psychologists, or merely as curious person.
                     Richards’ work we can see that literary criticism factual, scientific and complete. It no longer remains matter of the application of set rules or mere “intuition” or impressions. His critical analysis, interpretation and evaluation have exercised considerable influence on the new critics everywhere. His approach towards criticism is pragmatic and empirical.
The Importance of Words:
                     A study of his practical criticism together with his work ‘The Meaning of Meaning’ his interested in verbal and textual analysis.
       Meaning of a word depends upon four factors these are:
1)                Sense:  
                      It meant some that communicated the plain literal meaning of the words.
2)                Feeling:  
                  It’s refer to the emotions, emotional attitude like that pleasure, unpleasure and the rest.
3)                Tone:         
            The writer use of words and arranges them keeping in minds the taste of his readers. Feeling is only state of mind.

4)                Intention:  
                     Intention controls the emphasis, shapes the arrangement, or draws attention to something of importance.

              Richards says “original language may have been almost pure emotive that is to say a means of expressing feeling about situation, a means of expressing impersonal attitude and a means of bringing about concerted action.”
              In the poem every words is very importance because every word has different meaning in different reader.
  Figurative Language:
                           Richards ‘methodology is a scientific one. His approach is specifically, inductive. Richards lays out the 13 poem together with the students responses to them, all this with a view to documenting the sheer variety and divergence of their interpretations of the very same work.
                           In Figurative Language critical commentary-causes of misunderstanding. The distraction of meter, Intuitive versus over-literal reading, Literalism and metaphor, poetic liberty, Mixture in metaphor, personification, reason for advantages of dangers of critical comparison. The diversity of aims in poetry.
v  Sources of Misunderstanding in poetry:
              According to Richards there are four sources of misunderstanding of poetry. His control of thought is ordinary his chief means to the control of our feeling and in the immense majority of instances we misread his sense. This element of truth in them makes them most deceptive and misleading. The reader may fail to understand the sense of the poet because he is ignorance poet’s sense.
v  The Value of Figurative Language:
                                         Poets use a figurative language, and this use of poetic figures poses a number of difficult and interesting problems. This power and value of figurative language, as well as problems and difficulties of figurative language in general, can be better appreciated by a study of a few concrete examples.
v  Mixed Metaphors:       
                                                Mixtures in metaphors work well if in the mixture the different parts or elements do not cancel each other out. The mixture must not be the fire and water types as it certainly is in the passage concerned. The mixture must not be of the fire and water like ‘woven’ does not mix well with sea and lightening.
Figurative Language:
                           The critic is the right in pointing out,  that if down were there, night and night’s lighting would not be present. But all such explanations are not sufficient to justify the presence of dawn in the poem. According to Richards language can be used in two ways, i.e. the scientific use and the emotive one. Two uses of language shows the scientific way is precise, clear and matter of fact, but in poetry one can make use of fiction and the author says that truth in a work of art means only the internal necessity or rightness of the work of art.
The Value off personification:
              Personification in the poem, amounts to a general objection to all personification and, therefore, deserves to be considered at length. It is so in the history of the race and in the individual biography. No wonder that if what we have to say about inanimate from only appropriate if strict sense is our sole consideration to persons and human relation.
Comparative criticism:
                                         Richards warns his reader poet and against the dangers of over simple forms of ‘Comparative Criticism’. A critic has compared the Shelley is clear in the conception.
                                  When after five verses of antics chiefly concerned with the could itself in its afternoon dissolution, he cuts the personification down, mixture his metaphors to reflect its incoherence and finally.
Conclusion:
                           We can say that, a proper understanding of figurative language needs closer study. Its literal sense must be carefully followed, but such literal reading must not come in the way of an imagination appreciation of it.       


No comments:

Post a Comment