3.8 Article

An ecostylistic analysis of selected extracts from Michael Punke's novel The Revenant

期刊

COGENT ARTS & HUMANITIES
卷 10, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS AS
DOI: 10.1080/23311983.2023.2244209

关键词

ecostylistics; fiction; foregrounding; SFG; stylistics analysis; transitivity processes; >

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This article presents an ecostylistic analysis of selected extracts from Michael Punke's novel The Revenant (2002) using an eclectic methodological framework. The study aims to reveal the power hierarchy between human and non-human participants, and how nature elements impact human survival in the fictional context. Through a close reading of six selected extracts, the study demonstrates how the author portrays nature as an effective participant, both as a savior and a threat to the main character's life.
This article presents an ecostylistic analysis of selected extracts from Michael Punke'snovel The Revenant (2002). The aims of the study are achieved in termsof an eclectic methodological framework. The study aims at revealing the powerhierarchy created in the selected texts between human and non-human participants.Also, it aims to show how the elements of nature affect the survival of humansin the fictional context by identifying the ecostylistic features in the literarytext. A close ecostylistic reading of sixselected extracts from the novel using Systemic Functional Grammar (SFG) tools (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014[1985])and Zurru's (2017) approach is followed. Moreover, the study presents a qualitativeinvestigation of stylistic elements such as foregrounded features and deviatedlanguage patterns. Thus, conducting an ecostylistic analysis of the chosenpassages, and, demonstrating how the author portrays the environment with allits elements as an effective participant helps to appreciate nature. Thefindings show that nature acts as the main character's savior and a threat tohis life; it also demonstrates how nature works as a powerful active participantin portraying the events of the novel.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

3.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据