Stylistic anaylsis on drama text Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Stylistic anaylsis on drama text - Essay characterDespite being a king, who is powerful, Arthur does not through back insults at the man who continuously insults him. The second character, who is worldly concern, is a disrespectful and arrogant person. He haughtily slops to great power Arthur. He abuses him and calls him names like pig and dog. He does not respect the fact that Arthur is a king. The other character in the play, who is Galahad, is an enquiry person. He asks what the man was doing in England and if there was some wholeness else they could talk to. Turn taking and topic control Conversations require to be controlled. in that location are norms to overtake who talks and at what time. There are two steering norms in conversations (Short, 1996). These are 1. One person to talk at a time 2. There should be no silence spells. The above helps a conversation to be smooth. In the extract below, questions have been used to signal the turn of the next speaker. humanness A llo. Whoo is eet? Arthur I am king Arthur and these are my Knights of the Round Table. Whose castle is this? Man This is the castle of my master, Guy de Loimbard. In the extract below, the norm of turn taking has been ignored. Man speaks even before Arthur questiones his point. This is a sign of some misunderstanding. Arthur Now look here, my good man Man I dont want to talk to you no more, you empty-headed animal food trough The rule of topic control has been violated in the text. The subject matter in the conversation was King Arthur and his men seeking for accommodation in Guy de Lombards castle. As the conservation goes on, man deviates from the subject matter by naughtily telling King Arthur that his matter already has one and it is nice. This leads to the conversation being agitated, Man throwing insults at Arthur and ends up with one of Arthurs men being killed. Conservational implicatures Conversational implicatures occur when one flouts a conversational maxim so as to pas s intendedinformation which has not been literary expressed,(Wilson & Sperber 1981).In the text in question, there are instances where conversational maxims have been flouted to pass a supplementary meaning which has not been literally brought out. For example, the maxim of quality has been violated in the dialogue below from the extract. Arthur Are you sure hes got one? Man Oh yes. Its very nice. Fromthe above, man has violated the maxim of quality. He gives more information than simply doing what he has been requested to do. He wants Arthur to slam that not only has his master got it but what he has is also nice. There is also an instance where the maxim (Wilson & Sperber, 1981) of manner has been violated. The speaker is unintelligible and purposely confound when he responds to a question or when it is his turn to speak. The speaker fails to be concise and brief. In the example below Arthur If you will not show us the Grail we shall storm your castle. Man You dont frighten us, English pig-dog. Go and boil your bottom, son of a silly person. I blow my lever on you so-called Arthur King, you and your silly English k.niggets. We see that man gets out of topic and starts throwing insults at King Arthur. He does that to show what he feels virtually King Arthur. We also notice a conversational impl