HETEROGLOSSIA

The term heteroglossia describes the coexistence of distinct varieties within a single "language". It originates from Greek: hetero- "different" and glssa "tongue, language"). The term was coined by ikhail !akhtin in his "#$% &a&er "Discourse in the Novel."

erriam 'ebster dictionary defines heteroglossia as (a diversity of voices, styles of discourse, or &oints of view in a literary work and es&ecially a novel.) *im&lified, heteroglossia is a (vast variety of language use &articularly evident in novels.) +eteroglossia is contrasted to monologia which is (univocal, fixed meaning of the state or official language) ,+errick -$%). Discourse in the Novel !akhtin, in his Discourse in the Novel, a&&eals for a fundamentally different a&&roach to analy.ing the novelistic style. The reason why the traditional stylistics could not be a&&lied to the novel lies in the fact that it considered the novel as a &oetic genre and, therefore, as not fundamentally different in style from, for exam&le, &oetry. !akhtin, on the other hand, insists on a fundamental stylistic difference between the &oetic genres and the novel. The former are fully develo&ed, i.e. finali.ed, single languaged and single styled, while the latter is com&osed of several heterogeneous stylistic unities that combine to form the stylistic system of the novel which !akhtin considers to be still develo&ing / unfinali.ed. 0ive basic com&ositional1stylistic unities that are integrated in the novel are the following: ". -. $. 2irect authorial literary1artistic narration ,in all its divers variants) *tyli.ation of the various forms of oral everyday narration *tyli.ation of the various forms of written semiliterary everyday narration ,e.g. the letter, the diary, etc.)

%.

3arious forms of literary but extra1artistic authorial s&eech ,e.g. moral, &hiloso&hical or scientific statements)

4.

The stylistically individuali.ed s&eech of characters

Heteroglossia in the Novel +eteroglossia denotes the different stratas ,*ocial, &rofessional, dialects, 5argons etc) in the same language. Thus, heteroglossia is o&&osed to unitary language and what makes its uni6ueness is this diversity. In the novel, heteroglossia introduces a re1organi.ation of all the levels of a language current at the time described in there. 0irst of all, in a novel ,!akhtin used as an exam&le 2ickens7 comic novel) one will identify the (common language) of a given social grou&, used by the author as (a common view) in order to a&&roach the reader. *econdly, the author will take distance from this (common view), by ob5ectifying it. *ometimes he will exaggerate, sometime he will agree8 he will not be static, but in a &er&etual movement. 0inally, (the common view) will be linked to other languages in a gradual way or abru&tly. In order to do so, the style of the novel will move from e&ic to 5ournalistic, &oetic and so on. This inter1action between languages is made through dialogisation. The languages will not fuse together and this &ermits us to identify them. !akhtin mentioned two distinct features of heteroglossia in the novel: ". 9 combination of different languages and verbal1ideological belief systems. This means that the character:s &erce&tion of the world ,his ideological world) is ex&ressed through his discourse ,for exam&le, a 5udge would s&eak as a 5udge in the everyday life). -. These languages and the socio1belief systems that they denote are incor&orated in the novel for author:s intentions. They are tested, unmasked, and then destroyed as they were false and hy&ocritical.

Double-voiced discourse 'hat is it; It7s "another7s s&eech in another7s language", which means: there are two voices, two meanings and two ex&ressions8 these two voices are dialogically interrelated, it is as if they actually hold a conversation with each other8 exam&les would be comic or ironic discourse or &arody. ,<ote that heteroglossia is related to dialogism in lots of as&ects) 'hat is the role of double1voiced discourse; !akhtin argues that the &ower of the novel originates in the coexistence of, and conflict between, different ty&es of s&eech: the s&eech of characters, the s&eech of narrators, and even the s&eech of the author. +e defines heteroglossia as "another7s s&eech in another7s language, serving to ex&ress authorial intentions but in a refracted way." !akhtin identifies the direct narrative of the author, rather than dialogue between characters, as the &rimary location of this conflict. Thus, the author takes someone else7s direct discourse and infuses it with authorial intentions and consciousness, kee&ing at the same time the original s&eaker:s intention. In a non1literary context, on the other hand, when we s&eak, someone else7s words are introduced into our own s&eech assuming a new inter&retation and becoming sub5ect to our evaluation of them, i.e., we add our own intentions to earlier utterances that we use in our &resent s&eech. !akhtin mentions that double1voiced discourse hel&s to s&eak indirectly, conditionally, in a refracted way, to introduce more ex&ressive intentions and to develo& the idea of heteroglossia. Heteroglossia in novel versus poetic genres !akhtin viewed the modern novel as a literary form best suited for the ex&loitation of heteroglossia, in direct contrast to e&ic &oetry ,and, in a lesser degree, &oetry in general). The

linguistic energy of the novel was seen in its ex&ression of the conflict between voices through their adscri&tion to different elements in the novel7s discourse. 9ny language, in !akhtin7s view, stratifies into many voices: "social dialects, characteristic grou& behavior, &rofessional 5argons, generic languages, languages of generations and age grou&s, tendentious languages, languages of the authorities, of various circles and of &assing fashions." This diversity of voice is, !akhtin asserts, the defining characteristic of the novel as a genre. Traditional stylistics, like e&ic &oetry, do not share the trait of heteroglossia. In !akhtin7s words, "&oetry de&ersonali.es 7days7 in language, while &rose, as we shall see, often deliberately intensifies difference between them..." =xtending his argument, !akhtin &ro&oses that all languages re&resent a distinct &oint of view on the world, characteri.ed by its own meaning and values. In this view, language is "shot through with intentions and accents," and thus there are no neutral words. =ven the most unremarkable statement &ossesses a taste, whether of a &rofession, a &arty, a generation, a &lace or a time. To !akhtin, words do not exist until they are s&oken, and that moment they are &rinted with the signature of the s&eaker. !akhtin identifies the act of s&eech, or of writing, as a literary1verbal &erformance, one that re6uires s&eakers or authors to take a &osition, even if only by choosing the dialect in which they will s&eak. *e&arate languages are often identified with se&arate circumstances. !akhtin gives an exam&le of an illiterate &easant, who s&eaks >hurch *lavonic to God, s&eaks to his family in their own &eculiar dialect, sings songs in yet a third, and attem&ts to emulate officious high1class dialect when he dictates &etitions to the local government. The &rose writer, !akhtin argues, must welcome and incor&orate these many languages into his work.

The h brid utterance The hybrid utterance, as defined by !akhtin, is a &assage that em&loys only a single s&eaker?the author, for exam&le?but one or more kinds of s&eech. The 5uxta&osition of the two different s&eeches brings with it a contradiction and conflict in belief systems. !akhtin goes on to discuss the interconnectedness of conversation. =ven a sim&le dialogue, in his view, is full of 6uotations and references, often to a general "everyone says" or "I heard that..." @&inion and information are transmitted by way of reference to an indefinite, general source. !y way of these references, humans selectively assimilate the discourse of others and make it their own. !akhtin identifies a s&ecific ty&e of discourse, the "authoritative discourse," which demands to be assimilated by the reader or listener8 exam&les might be religious dogma, or scientific theory, or a &o&ular book. This ty&e of discourse is viewed as &ast, finished, hierarchically su&erior, and therefore demands "unconditional allegiance" rather than acce&ting inter&retation. !ecause of this, !akhtin states that authoritative discourse &lays an insignificant role in the novel. !ecause it is not o&en to inter&retation, it cannot enter into hybrid utterance. !akhtin concludes by arguing that the role of the novel is to draw the authoritative into 6uestion, and to allow that which was once considered certain to be conflicted and o&en to inter&retation. In effect, novels not only function through heteroglossia, but must &romote it8 to do otherwise is an artistic failure. To!ards a Ne! Linguistics !akhtin calls for a shift away from languages as systems, towards social uses of language. Aanguage is only unitary in the abstract. In its social use, it o&erates as an irreducible &lurality of belief1systems. uch of language1use is also intertextual, referring

back to others: statements and views. !akhtin sees language as an ongoing, unending chain

of meaning which is constantly renewed and reborn through each link in the chain. Aanguages and cultures are always unfinished. *imilarly, nothing is ever absolutely dead, since it is connected to everything else by the chain of meanings. @ne as&ect of this analysis is the idea of speech-genres. 9ccording to !akhtin, in addition to the forms of language, there are standard ways in which language is combined. Barticular choices within a national language constitute &articular s&eech1genres. =ach s&here of language1use tends to have stable ty&es of utterances. This view, in which the relationshi& between an entire language and an individual s&eech1act is mediated by s&eech1genres, contrasts with the freedom usually attributed to s&eakers. *&eech1genres include such .ones of language as 5ournalistic styles, regional dialects and ideological systems. =ach genre embeds in its language &articular social values, world1 views and intentionalities. !akhtin treats s&eech1genres as the site of the intersection between language and history. 2ifferent s&eech1genres give ex&ression to contradictions between &ast and &resent, between different social and ideological forces and so on. The interaction of s&eech1genres constantly &roduces new s&eech1genres. <ew relations &roduce new forms of s&eech, or give new meanings to old forms. It is also at the site of s&eech1genres that language becomes meaningful and useful for &articular sub5ects. "e Ter#s in $a%htin&s Theor The Utterance or Word In !akhtin7s view, an expression in a living context of exchange11termed a "word" or "utterance"11is the main unit of meaning ,not abstract sentences out of context), and is formed through a s&eaker7s relation to @therness ,other &eo&le, others7 words and ex&ressions, and the lived cultural world in time and &lace). 9 "word" is therefore always already embedded in a history of ex&ressions by others in a chain of ongoing cultural and &olitical moments.

9n utterance'!ord is marked by what !akhtin terms "9ddressivity" and "9nswerability" ,it is always addressed to someone and antici&ates, can generate, a response, antici&ates an answer). Discourse ,chains or strings of utterances) is thus fundamentally dialogic and historically contingent ,&ositioned within, and inse&arable from, a community, a history, a &lace). To conclude, heteroglossia refers to use of different languages, where languages can be the &oint of view of the narrator and the different dialogue of the characters. !y creating a novel with heteroglossia, the text can be read by many &eo&le and not 5ust one &articular grou&. !akhtin ex&ressed this beautifully when he said: (9uthorial s&eech, the s&eeches of narrators, inserted genres, the s&eech of characters are merely those fundamental com&ositional unities with whose hel& heteroglossia can enter the novel8 each of them &ermits a multi&licity of social voices and a wide variety of their links and interrelationshi&s between utterances and languages, this movement of the theme through different ,always more or less dialogi.ed.)C1this is the basic distinguishing feature of the stylistics of the novel"