NARRATOR’S IMPERSONAL-INDIRECT SPEECH AS A MEANS OF CREATING AN ETHNOCULTURAL NARRATIVE (BASED ON THE MATERIAL OF MODERN ENGLISH-LANGUAGE AMERICAN INDIAN PROSE)
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.32782/2412-933X/2025-XXIV-8Keywords:
speech, impersonal-indirect speech, narrator, ethnocultural narrative, Amerindian proseAbstract
The article is devoted to the narrator’s impersonal-indirect speech, the means of creating such speech and its function in the formation of an ethnocultural narrative.The purpose of the article is to identify and analyze the narrator’s impersonal-indirect speech as a means of creating an ethnocultural narrative on the material of modern English-speaking Amerindian prose. The main tasks are to investigate the textual-stylistic, functional-semantic specificity of the narrator’s impersonal-indirect speech and analyze it as a means of speech of a descriptive strategy for creating an ethnocultural background of a literary text and a way of highlighting the ethnocultural values of the Amerindian ethnos.As a result of the study, it was found that the narrator's impersonal-indirect speech studied by us is specified as a form of transmitting someone else’s speech (a syntactic-stylistic phenomenon) and as a way of presenting content (a literary and artistic technique). The model of impersonal- indirect speech of the narrator of the ethnocultural narrative is explicated by personal pronouns of the first person singular/plural and by the representation of a detailed narration of events with the explication of one’s own point of view, using verbs of thought, remarks, comments regarding a particular character or event to which the narrator has a direct relationship, disguising himself behind the image of a character hero. The narrators in the texts analyzed in our work implement their speech according to the principle of “storytelling”, which is characteristic of Amerindian fairy tales, myths and legends. So, preserving this mythological tradition of storytelling, the narrator constantly acts as the central narrative character, supposedly drawing the reader's full attention to his story and doing so in a mosaic-ornamental way: he tells about current events, but artistically weaves in an ethnocultural layer as an explication of the significance of those ethnocultural values, symbols, cults, and artifacts that are important for Amerindians of all generations.
References
Андрієвскаа А.А. Невласне-пряме мовлення у прозі Луї Арагона. Київ : Вид-во Київ. Ун-та, 1967. 171 с.
Бабаликашвілі Н.Г. Форма неособисто-прямой мови і її еволюція (за матеріалами англомовної прози XVIII−XX ст.) : дис. … канд. філол. наук : 10.02.04. Тбілісі, 1986. 23 с.
Бехта І.А. Інтерпретативна властивість наративної моделі експериментального письма. Науковий вісник Східноєвропейського національного університету імені Лесі Українки. Філологічні науки. Мовознавство. Луцьк : ВНУ ім. Лесі Українки, 2013. № 19 (268). С. 133−140.
Близнюк М.І. Конститутивні признаки неособисто-прямої мови в сучасній англомовній прозі : автореф. дис. … канд. філол. наук : 10.02.04. Одеса, 1988. 16 с.
Мацевко-Бекерська Л.В. Наратологічна проекція концепту ГЕРОЙ. Питання літературознавства. Інститут літератури ім. Т.Г. Шевченка НАН України, 2009. С. 278−292.
Bickerton D. Modes of Interior Monologue : A Formal Definition. Modern Language Quaterly. 1967. Vol. 28, 2. P. 229−239.
Bronner S.J. Folk Nation : folklore in the creation of American tradition. Washington : American visions. 2002.
Brunvand J.H. The Study of American Folklore. An Introduction. New York : W.W. Norton and Company, 1968.
Cohn D. Narrated Monologue. Definition of a Fictional Style. Comparative Literature. 1966. Vol. XVIII. P. 97−112.
Dorson R.M. American Folklore. Chicago : The University of Chicago Press, 1959. 324 p.
Erdrich L. Love Medicine. New York : Henry Holt and Company, 1993. 332 р.
Erdrich L. The Painted Drum. New York : Harper Collins Publishers, 2005. 277 р.
Hogan L. Mean Spirit. New York : The Ballantine Publishing Group, 1990. 198 р.
McHalle B. Free Indirect Discourse : A Survey of Recent Account. A Journal of Descriptive Poetics and Theory of Literature. 1978. № 3. P. 249−287.