For the development of any theoretical discipline, it is always very important to present practical evidence for the reliability of theoretical postulates. It is commonly known that theory is worth nothing without practical ground, the same goes with a practice that is not supported by theoretical background. This statement justifies the necessity of this work because the present essay will be dedicated to the study of the definite poetic text under the title “Untitled Poem” by Sharon Livermore as an example of discourse. The text will be analyzed from the point of view of literary discourse and semiotic analysis will be applied as well.
In the first place, it is necessary to define the term “discourse” because of the multiplicity of existing definitions of the notion. This multiplicity is caused by the fact that discourse “has become common currency” in a great number of disciplines: sociology, linguistics, philosophy, etc. (Mills 1). The same author states that discourse is better defined by what it is not, thus, discourse is frequently characterized by its difference from text, sentence, ideology, and each of these terms contributes to the understanding of discourse. Since the linguistic point of view presents special interest for us, let us mention that linguists define “discourse” as “language in use”, “the text above the level of utterance or sentence” (Mills 8). However, it is important to distinguish between the terms “text” and “discourse”. Johansen states that discourse means “resorting to a meta-level to inquire into the presuppositions of knowledge, techniques and capabilities, ethics, and how to reconstruct the past”; significantly, the text is the usual outcome (88). The simplest way to interpret “discourse” will be to define it as the text that is immersed in life.
On defining the term “discourse”, it is necessary to tackle the notion of “discourse analysis”. What is more, it is necessary to define the purpose of such an analysis. Discourse analysis may be defined broadly as the way of approaching and analyzing the problem. Thus, the purpose of discourse analysis is the revelation of the themes hidden behind the text. Concerning discourse analysis of a literary work, it is possible to state that the main form of analysis will be a deconstructive reading of the text and its analysis from different perspectives, depending on the type of discourse that may be applied to the text under analysis.
Following Habermas, Johansen distinguishes four types of discourse: theoretical, technical, practical, and historical discourse (95). Since the text under analysis is poetic work belonging to imaginative literature, it is evident, that it should be analyzed as literary discourse as well. This means that the criteria for the analysis should be the following: fictionality, poeticity, and inquisitorially (Johansen 97). Besides, the semiotic analysis will be also included as literary texts are characterized by a high concentration of symbols and signs.
Referring to the classification of discourse by Habermas, The poem “Untitled Poem” may be analyzed as historical discourse. The explanation of the choice is as follows: the authoress, Sharon Livermore, is a person who belongs to the indigenous population of Australia. This is why the poem may be considered to be the primary source of information. The poem depicts the life of the aboriginal population of Australia, their oppression by foreigners. This means that the text is the reflection of the historical situation. Thus, the poetic text that tackles historical problems and classical historical texts resemble one another from the point of view of the similarity of their themes. However, the methods of the embodiment of the themes and ideas of the authors differ due to the principal differences of the genres the texts belong to. The poem’s belonging to poetry is the decisive factor in the author’s choice of the form of narration. If conventional historical texts that represent historical discourse, like documents or accounts of historical events, periods, and epochs, are built based on real accounts of history and factual information, the poem as historical discourse is based only on the general historical situation with no reference to particular factual data. However, the sign of historical discourse in this text is the usage of Australian realities, like “bush tucker” (Livermore line 30). On the whole, the historical conditionality of the poem is of great importance, but the text’s belonging to imaginative literature should be the first consideration of this analysis.
Since the poem “Untitled Poem” is the example of poetry, it is necessary to analyze it from the point of view of semiotics. In order to clarify the situation, it is necessary to introduce the term “semiotics”. The simplest way to understand the nature of semiotics is to define it as the study of sign. However, semiotics involves not only what we consider signs of everyday speech, but “of everything that stands for something else” (Chandler 2). It means that words, sounds, gestures, objects may be perceived as signs. In our case, words that are given symbolic meaning are of great importance because they may be interpreted as signs. In order not to be unsubstantiated let us set some examples of signs in “Untitled Poem”. The very title may be analyzed as a sign. If a literary work is “untitled”, it usually means that the author does not want to bear responsibility for imposing his views on the readers; she intentionally leaves it up to the reader to make a final decision about the idea of the work as a suitable title. So, “untitled” is the sign of freedom of choice. The theme of pain is marked with help of the word “pain”, though it may be argued, but exact statement “pain” still symbolizes pain, alone with other signs of pain expressed by the words: “musket”, “naked”, “outcasts” (Livermore line 18, 25).
The poem as literary discourse should also be analyzed from the point of view of fictionality, poeticity and inquisitoriality. Fictionality is the feature that is necessary for literary text. It means that the plane of expression and the plane of content are relatively autonomous. This has been proven by the analysis of the signs in the previous paragraph. Poeticity of the discourse may be illustrated by the rhyme of the poem. A significant fact is that several lines rhyme with the word “pain”, thus, rhyme contributes to the expression of the main idea of the poem, the pain suffered by Australia and indigenous people with the intrusion of strangers. Stylistic expressive means may be also considered the means for creation of poeticity of the discourse. The examples of expressive means are: metaphors (“saltwater woman”, “wooden house”), epithets (“eyes soft and black”), antithesis (“you’re not scared of strangers and welcome new friends”) (Livermore line 8). Inquisitoriality means that the author may choose not to stick to realty; he/she may reject the norms of society. Livermore resorts to the personification of the land, the country, which is presented by the authoress as the mother of people who feels sorry for her children’s sufferings. The authoress leaves it up to the reader to support or reject her point of view; still, her strong position may be observed in the text.
Drawing a conclusion, it should be stated that discourse analysis gives an opportunity to analyze the text not as a separate unit that is torn out of literature and reality. It is the analysis of the text that is based on reality. The analysis of one text as the example of different types of discourse makes the analysis multidimensional. Discourse analysis of the poem “Untitled Poem” by Livermore as historical and literary discourse has made it possible to define the basic theme of the poem: the unjust suffering of indigenous Australian population under oppression of intruders.
Works Cited
Chandler, Daniel. Semiotics: the Basics. NY: Routledge, 2002.
Johansen, Jordan Dines. Literary discourse: A Semiotic-Pragmatic Approach to Literature. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2002.
Livermore, Sharon. Untitled Poem. 2009. Web.
Mills, Sara. Discourse. NY: Routledge, 2004.