Discourse Strategies and the Evocation of Solidarity in Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s Novels

(1)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

DISCOURSE STRATEGIES AND THE EVOCATION OF SOLIDARITY IN CHIMAMANDA NGOZI ADICHIE’S

NOVELS

BY

TERRUMUN HEMBAOR GAJIR (147790)

B.A. (Hons.) English (BSU Makurdi), M.A. Literature (BSU Makurdi)

A Thesis in the Department of English, submitted to the Faculty of Arts in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

of the

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

January 2017

(2)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

ABSTRACT

Solidarity within social groups is a prominent thematic preoccupation in contemporary African literary works. Previous studies on Adichie’s three novels: Purple Hibiscus (PH), Half of a Yellow Sun (HOAYS) and AMERiCANAH (AH), have examined textual aspects such as language, context, style, and themes with little attention on discourse strategies as they evoke social solidarity in the novels. This study, therefore, examined discourse strategies in relation to how they evoked social solidarity and textual cohesion with a view to deepening the understanding of the texts.

The study adopted M.A.K. Halliday’s model of Systemic Functional Linguistics as framework, complemented with Fairclough’s model of Critical Discourse Analysis and Durkheim’s concept of solidarity. The data consisted of 152 extracts from the three novels:

42 from PH, 61 from HOAYS and 49 from AH. These extracts, selected on the basis of their relevance to the evocation of social solidarity and textual cohesion, were subjected to discourse analysis.

Discourse strategies such as referential, perspectivation, intensification and mitigation were the major tools for the construction of social solidarity. The referential strategy, a process of constructing and representing social actors by membership categorisation, was exhibited in the form of nominal groups like ‘‘my brother’’(PH),‘‘our family’’(PH),‘‘my man’’(HOAYS), ‘‘Northerners’’(HOAYS),‘‘Black British’’(AH), ‘‘Non-American Blacks’’(AH), and was used to construct characters’ social identities, with the aim of specifying the nature of their social solidarity. Perspectivation, in terms of the narrative point of view, was realised in the form of personal pronouns (I/we/us/they/them) which were used to articulate characters’ perspectives and commitment to social solidarity.

Intensification, which implies explicit expressions of qualifying/modifying the epistemic status of propositions, was realised in the use of modal auxiliary ‘‘will’’. For example, ‘‘we will take care of the baby; we will protect him’’ (PH). Similarly, the expression ‘‘Try and make friends with our African American brothers and sisters in a spirit of true pan- Africanism’’ (AH) was a form of explicit intensification, and signified cross-national solidarity. Mitigation, an implicit reference to social solidarity, was realised in expressions like ‘‘There’s no American nonsense in that house’’ (AH) which showed preference for African over American culture. While these discourse strategies enhance mostly familial and kinship solidarities in PH and HOAYS, cross-national solidarity was realised in AH.

Expressions with lexical sense relations such as hyponymy (‘‘Kano/North’’ in HOAYS), and meronymy (‘‘black locals/Black Americans’’ in AH), as well as reiteration and collocation amplified social solidarity and enhanced lexical cohesion in Adichie’s texts. In most cases the use of conjunctions, substitutions, and elliptical structures intensified communication of intentions that augmented social solidarity and reinforced grammatical cohesion.

Discourse strategies evoked aspects of social solidarity such as collectivism, cooperation, group loyalty and textual cohesion in Adichie’s novels. These provide insights into meaningful and profound interpretations of Adichie’s works.

Keywords: Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s novels, Discourse strategies, Textual cohesion, Social solidarity

Word count: 452

(3)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I sincerely appreciate the almighty God for his protection, guidance and support.

My God, your favours in my life are too numerous to mention, I owe you a lot. Thanks a lot for bringing me thus far.

My heartfelt gratitude goes to my supervisor, Professor O. A. Ogunsiji, for his tireless efforts in ensuring a successful completion of this thesis. He was there for me at all times of the day. He took this work as his personal project and our relationship become more like colleagues. I will not forget that particular Sunday when Professor Ogunsiji and his amiable wife had to hastily break from church service just to attend to my work. He made me feel at home in Ibadan. Though as his student he rather prefers to introduce me as his colleague to visitors. I have learnt from him the quintessence of life and dedication to duty. May almighty God continue to bless you and members of his entire family?

I am also appreciative and wish to particularly acknowledge the fatherly contributions of Professor A. L. Oyeleye, in whose affable life-style I have learnt not just only language related issues but a lot of lessons about humility, philanthropy, dedication and enthusiasm to scholarship. I am particularly happy that I have met him at this exacting moment in my life; I will forever be delighted to dwell in ‘his father’s house!’

Others that must be recognised for their assiduous contributions to this thesis include: the Head of Department of English, Professor E. O. Omobowale, and Professors A. O. Dasylva, A. Raji-Oyelade, Obododimma Oha, Ayobami Kehinde, S. A. Odebumi Adenike Akinjobi and Olutoyin B. Jegede. I am indebted to Professor M. A. Alo, who was very instrumental to ensuring that my abstract met the requisite conditions for approval. I am also pleased to acknowledge the contributions of the PG coordinator in the Department, Dr Doyin Aguero, who always made extra efforts to keep me abreast about the developments in the Department. Other members of staff in the Department and from other Departments whose support to the progress of this work must be appreciated include: Dr R. O. Olaniyi, the Sub-Dean (Postgraduate) Faculty of Arts, and Drs Adesina B. Sunday, Adetunji Kazeem Adebiyi, Ayo Osisanwo, A. A. Lewis, B. A. Lasisi, P. A.

Taiwo, S. A. Faleti and others too numerous to mention. I am also indebted to the assistance I received from other members of staff in the Department such as: Mr Iyiola Olatunji, Mr Victor Romauld, and Gbenga Olaoye; your various contributions to the successful completion of this study cannot be easily forgotten. I have discovered that the

(4)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

success recorded in the Department of English, University of Ibadan, over the years is largely due to the cordial relationship existing among members of staff. I pray that the almighty God in his endless mercies will continue to bless all the lecturers in the Department and the entire members of staff of University of Ibadan for their interest in pursuit of genuine scholarship.

Others whose support to the success of the work must be acknowledged are: the Dean of Postgraduate School, Professor A. A. Aderinto, and all members of staff in the Postgraduate school of the University for their conscientiousness. I made a lot of friends, like Babatunde Adebimpe, from the Postgraduate School and learnt ineradicable lessons from their friendly but disciplined lives.

I am also delighted to mention the assistance I received from Professor A.

Dzurgba during the pursuit of this academic endeavour. Sir, you introduced me to the Department of English of the prestigious University of Ibadan (UI); you took me to Professor O. A. Ogunsiji’s office and pleaded with him to be my supervisor. Though a difficult task, he has conscientiously carried out this assignment. The success of this work must be accredited to you for finding him worthy to supervise a novice in UI research practice. Remain blessed.

I am grateful to the management of Benue State University, under the leadership of Professor Moses Msugh Kembe, for giving me the opportunity to pursue this programme. My thanks also go to my colleagues most especially my Head of Department, Professor Abimbola Shittu, for his interest and encouragement during my studies. Special mention must also be made of my teacher, Dr David Shim Orjime, whom colleagues in the Department prefer to address as ‘my father’. I have learnt from this charming academic that life is nothing but a hilarious voyage. In spite of your health challenges, you still wax stronger everyday and cheerfully attend to your students and daily schedules every hour of the day; few of your kind exist. Sir, be assured that your struggles will not be in vain. Similarly, mention must also be made of the contributions of Mr Za-Ayem Agye and Mr Isaac Yongo to my academic quest and this work in particular. The two of them, particularly, took time to read my work and offer useful suggestions which have gone a long to shape this thesis. I am also pleased with Professor Lucy Irene Vajime, who has played a vital role in my entry into the University system. I may not have much to offer her but I wish her long life and prosperity. And to all my

(5)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

colleagues in English and other Departments of Benue State University, whose names I have not been able to mention; I wish you well and thank you too.

Furthermore, my profound appreciation goes to all the great scholars whose works provided invaluable insights for me to carry out this work. Your researches contributed a lot to the ideas that led to the fashioning of this thesis. Your priceless ideas shall continue to inspire and generate more scholarship in this and other fields.

I am also grateful to members of my family for their love and support during the period I undertook this study. My candid appreciation goes to members of my family, especially to my adorable wife, Ngohide, and children: Ahemense-Iyabo, Anam-Sisi, Aaor William, Ayiem Stephanie, Afa Favour, and Anenge Cini. I also wish to appreciate Keziah Terngu, Dr Tsoho Hembaor Gajir and his family, and our father, Reverend Hembaor Gajir. You might have suffered deprivation and lack of attention during the course of this study, but you made a rewarding sacrifice; thanks for your endurance. And I also extend my profound appreciation to my dear friends and colleagues: Drs Demian Anyam, Philip Bagu, Ukande Chris, Carmel Igba-Luga, Sarah Terwase Shittu, and Samuel Tondo, Ako sule Ali. My gratitude also goes to Terseer Jija, Asen Marcel, Ereshe Mary-Jane, Evelyn Erdoo Swende, Kwaghngee Johnson, Pastor Matthew, Abisola E.

Johnson and her siblings, Abaya Henry Demenongo and his affable family, and others too numerous to mention; I wish you well and also thank you all.

(6)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

CERTIFICATION

I certify that this work was carried out by Mr. Terrumun Hembaor Gajir in the Department of English, University of Ibadan, Nigeria.

_______________________________________

Supervisor O. A. Ogunsiji

B. ED. English (Jos), M. A., Ph. D. (Ibadan) Professor, Department of English,

University of Ibadan, Nigeria

(7)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

DEDICATION

I dedicate this thesis to Professor A. L. Oyeleye, in whose father’s house I am elated to dwell.

(8)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

2.2.4 Style as coherence ... 33

2.2.5 Style as the man ... 33

2.3 Stylistics ... 36

2.4 Discourse strategies ... 40

2.5 A review of some previous works on Adichie’s novels ... 44

2.6.0 Theoretical framework ... 51

2.6.1 Halliday’s Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL)... 52

2.6.2 Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) ... 56

2.6.3 Operations of SFL in CDA ... 64

2.6.3.1 The concept of meta-functions ... 64

2.6.3.2 Ideational meta-function ... 64

2.6.3.3 Interpersonal meta-function... 66

2.6.3.4 Textual meta-functions ... 66

2.7 Register and genre theory(R & GT) ... 67

2.7.1 Register variables ... 69

2.7.1.1 Field ... 69

2.7.1.2 Tenor ... 69

2.7.1.3 Mode ... 70

2.8 Principal systems: transitivity process, theme and mood ... 72

2.8.1 Transitivity process ... 72

2.8.2 Theme analysis ... 74

2.8.3 Mood ... 76

2.9 The concept of textual cohesion ... 78

2.9.1 Lexical cohesion ... 81

2.9.1.1 Repetitions/ Reiterations ... 82

2.9.1.2 Collocation/Colligation ... 84

2.10 Grammatical cohesion... 86

2.10.1 Reference in texture of texts ... 86

2.10.1.1 Endophoric reference: anaphoric and cataphoric cohesive relations ... 91

2.10.1.2 Exophoric reference ... 93

2.10.2 Conjunctions/Connectives ... 94

2.10.3 Substitution ... 97

2.10.3.1 Types of substitution: nominal substitution ... 98

2.10.3.2 Verbal substitution ... 99

2.10.3.3 Clausal substitution ... 99

2.10.4 Ellipsis ... 100

(10)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

2.10.4.1 Nominal ellipsis ... 101

2.10.4.1.1 Deictic as nominal ... 101

2.10.4.1. 2 Numerals as nominal ... 102

2.10.4.1.3 Epithets as nominal ... 102

2.10.4.2 Verbal Ellipsis... 103

2.10.4.3 Clausal ellipsis ... 103

2.11 The uses and referential range of nominal ... 104

2.12 Durkheim’s concept of social solidarity ... 108

2.12.1 Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and social solidarity... 110

2.13 Intertextuality and texture of texts ... 115

CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY 3.0 Introduction ... 120

3.1 Method of data collection... 120

3.2 Method of data analysis ... 123

CHAPTER FOUR DISCOURSE STRATEGIES FOR SOCIAL SOLIDARITY IN ADICHIE’S Purple Hibiscus (PH), Half of a Yellow Sun (HOAYS) AND AMERiCANAH (AH) 4.0 Introduction ... 125

4.1 Referential and predication strategies ... 125

4.2 Perspectivational discourse strategies ... 130

4.3 Intensification and mitigation discourse strategies ... 135

CHAPTER FIVE DISCOURSE STRATEGIES FOR TEXTUAL COHESION AND AMPLIFICATION OF SOCIAL SOLIDARITY IN ADICHIE’S Purple Hibiscus (PH), Half of a Yellow Sun (HOAYS) and AMERiCANAH (AH) 5.0 Introduction ... 139

5.1.1 Discourse strategies for lexical cohesion in Adichie’s Purple Hibiscus (PH), Half of a Yellow Sun (HOAYS) and AMERiCANAH (AH) ... 139

5.1.2 Reiteration/repetition ... 140

5.1.3 Collocation/Colligation ... 152

5.2 Devices for grammatical cohesion in Adichie’s Purple Hibiscus (PH), Half of a Yellow Sun (HAOYS) and AMERiCANAH (AH) ... 160

(11)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

5.2.1 Additive conjunction ... 160

5.2.2 Adversative conjunction... 169

5.2.3 Temporal conjunction ... 177

5.2.4 Causal conjunction ... 192

5.3 Substitution in Adichie’s Purple Hibiscus (PH), Half of a Yellow Sun (HOAYS) and AMERiCANAH (AH) ... 202

5.3.1 Nominal substitution ... 202

5.3.2 Verbal substitution ... 206

5.3.3 Clausal substitution ... 212

5.4 Ellipsis in Purple Hibiscus (PH), Half of a Yellow Sun (HOAYS) and AMERiCANAH (AH) ... 216

5.4.1 Nominal Ellipsis ... 216

5.4.2 Verbal Ellipsis ... 221

5.4.3 Clausal ellipsis ... 227

5.5 Reference in Adichie’s Purple Hibiscus (PH), Half of a Yellow Sun (HOAYS) and AMERiCANAH (AH) ... 232

5.5.1 Endophoric reference ... 233

5.5.2 Cataphoric reference ... 241

5.5.3 Exophoric reference ... 248

CHAPTER SIX SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 6.1 Summary ... 262

6.2 Conclusion ... 264

Reference...267

(12)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

LIST OF TABLES

1. Table 2.1: Functional organisation of language - - 70

2. Table 2.2: Basic options for conjunction - - 95

3. Table 2.3: Logical relations - - - 96

(13)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

LIST OF FIGURES

1. Figure 2.1: Lexico-grammatical networks - - 53

2. Figure 2.2: SFL strata and meta-functions - 55

3. Figure 2.3: Grammar, discourse and social activity - 56

4. Figure 2.4: Text as socio-cultural practice - 63

5. Figure 2.5: Language and social context - 68

6. Figure 2.6: The relationship between language and context- 71 7. Figure 2.7: Obligatory elements of genre structure - 72

8. Figure 2.8: Transitivity process - - - 73

9. Figure 2.9: Comparative reference - - - 87

10. Figure 2.10: Contrastive relations - - - 90

(14)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AH ……… AMERiCANAH

ADJ ……… Adjective

ADV ……… Adverb

CD …………. Critical discourse

CDA ………. Critical discourse analysis

DS ………. Durkheim’s solidarity

FCDA ………. Feminist critical discourse analysis

HOAYS ………. Half of a Yellow Sun

LR ………. Linguistic relativity

N ………. Noun

NP ……… Noun phrase

PH ……… Purple Hibiscus

PP ……… preposition

R&GT ………. Register and genre theory

SC ……… Social cohesion

SCT ……… Social cohesion theory

SF ……… Structural functionalism

SFL ……… Systemic functional linguistics

SS ………. Social solidarity

SV ………. Subject + Verb

SVO ……… Subject + Verb + Object

Text-Socio ……… Textual and social

(15)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

CHAPTER ONE

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the study

Language is the creative writer’s essential means of explicating different facets of social life. With language, the creative writer uses an assortment of ingenious discourse strategies to re-create events in the society. Thus, with the sole dependence of literature on language for its depiction of socio-political values of communities and people, creative writers deploy different discursive styles in literary texts in order to divulge the diverse beliefs, feelings, interactive goals, and aspirations of individuals and societies.

Since literature ‘finds its expression in language’ (Osundare, 2010: 2), language, therefore, is a vital tool used in literature to re-create happenings in the society.

The foregoing underlies the symbiotic relationship that exists between language, literature and society and this affirms the assertion that, ‘all our thinking’s, certainly about literature, are done in language’ (Rene-Wellek, 1971: 68). Apart from that, literature does not exist in a vacuum; it is about people and events in the society. In this regard, the nexus existing between language, literature and society is such that, ‘for any literary work to merit any meaningful consideration, it is necessary that it bears relevance, explicitly or implicitly to the social milieu in which it is set’ (Kehinde, 2005:

88). Apparently, the resourcefulness in the use of language to re-create events in the society is greatly induced by a variety of factors that spring from the social-milieu. What goes on in the society, as a result, has a direct bearing on the character of language in literary texts. This in turn shapes the quality of the textual networks that operates in the genres of literature, most especially the written ones. This assertion stems from the gap in communication that exists between the writers and their audience; and the linguistic character of the genre in question. The creative writer, for instance, has an overwhelming task to exploit language in order to overtly and unreservedly reveal events in the society.

Hence, writers like Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, are creatively consecrated in such a way that, their artistry in the use of language distinguish them from their contemporaries.

Thus, in order to meet up with the pace of events in the society, scholars, especially from the written tradition, are compelled to adopt peculiar discourse strategies that make their works to conform to the yearnings that spring from events in the society.

(16)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

This implies that, since literature is always a reflection of events in the society, the discourse strategies that emanate from the texture of literary genres, like the novel, evoke linguistic suppositions that project happenings within the society (Osundare, 2010). As a result, literature readily becomes a medium through which lives, values and aspirations of people are depicted (Cole, 2005). Novelists with African roots, like Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, are further obliged to combine western literary archetypes with the oracular mode of African tale-telling art which makes the textual networks in their creative works to flaunt atypical narrative choices unique to African settings.

Interestingly, with the intricate linguistic character in the textual networks of literary texts, there is a corresponding increase on the need to decipher the discourses in spite of complexities. Therefore, since language is a viable tool of communicating literary intent, there is a heavy reliance on insights from linguistics to unravel complications arising from the nexus in the textual networks of literary discourses. This reliance on linguistics for the interpretation of literary discourses has provoked the emergence of an array of linguistic theories as means of analyses, which are aimed at providing ample explanations about the textual intrigues in literary discourses. Conversely, some of these analytical means, like Halliday’s Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), consider language as an operating system, as van Dijk’s (1995) Socio-cognition Theory (ST), provides explanations that the mental representations in speech-acts are often articulated along the dimensions of ‘US’ versus ‘THEM’. This is a linguistic situation which positions social actors of particular social groups to present themselves and members of their group in positive terms, and then use negative expressions to refer to members of other groups (Jaffer, 2001). Other perspectives derived from linguistics include, Wodak’s Discourse Sociolinguistics (DS) and Fairclough’s model of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), which are concerned with the analysis of the relationships existing between texts and contexts, and the explication of social relations in literary discourses with a focus on how linguistic networks function to reveal interpersonal relationships that spring from instances of communication. The innovations brought about through insights from linguistics have indeed facilitated the interpretation of the complex textual quality of literary texts.

Halliday’s SFL particularly, has contributed immensely to the analysis of textual cohesion and foregrounding in the texture of discourses. This perspective has indeed provided new directions in the interpretation of not only linguistic networks in literary

(17)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

discourses, but has brought about a renewed interest in the study of the relationship between speech-acts and other social variables that operate in the texture of texts. The analytical insights from SFL have led to renewed interests into further probing of the relationship between literary texts and other subjects in the humanities, sciences, and an amplified concern for intra/inter texts relations.

Similarly, Fairclough’s model of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) has also broadened the scope of analysis of literary discourses to embrace interdisciplinary approach. This development has encouraged the use of either two or more analytical methods such as the combination of ethnography with structuralism and semiotics, discourse grammar with sociolinguistics and or pragmatics, ethno methodology with cognitive psychology, social psychology with historiography and perspectives from sociology, as analytical tools to interpret the linguistic systems and contextual variables operating in discourses. The scope of this method ranges from attempts to determine ways of speaking in cultural contexts, cognitive processes of social interactions, semantics and functional relations between sentences, to the various mental processes involved in the comprehension, and interactional accomplishment of the psychological phenomena such as understanding, explanations, beliefs, communicative intentions and contextual variables operating in textual networks.

Apparently, a synthesis of insights from these schools of thought is used as analytical means to unravel the multifarious nature of language use in discourses. This is because a synergy of relevant facets of these theories has the capacity to renew and re- sharpen our perception of these events as revealed in the textual networks, and therefore, offers a more astute interpretation of the social realities demonstrated in these texts. Re- sharpening of our world view suggests some sort of broadening of our perceptions of the extent to which the discourse strategies in these genres, like the novels, re-create divergent themes that bother on social events. It is interesting to note that inferences from synergies of insights to analyse literary discourses underline the fact that since the brand of language employed in novels, for instance, is also determined by the context that produces it; the discourse strategies in these texts, therefore, advance a linguistic network that provides useful clues that are generated from the social context. In other words, this implies that since discourse strategies in literary texts induce linguistic networks that replicate social contexts; one of the consequences of this re-enactment is the emergence of a textual quality that illuminates diverse interactions in the context. One of such

(18)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

textual effects is the communication of intentions that demonstrate social solidarity, the longing of individuals to stay together as members of particular social groups which is sometimes replicated by the peculiar linguistic networks operating in the textures of literary discourses.

Accordingly, given the complexities underlying textual networks in literary genres, it becomes obvious that to understand the plain but convoluted discourse strategies interlaced in the texts’ textures necessarily involves an all-inclusive scrutiny of its contents in relation to contextual factors that shape it. Consequently, an in-depth knowledge of the discourse strategies in textures of novels therefore involves recourse to linguistics and application of apt insights from other schools of thought for an overall understanding of the textual phenomena that sprout from these texts. This is so because it is only when these linguistic features are related with relevant perspectives from other ideologies that the textual properties become completely explicit. It entails, therefore, that to sieve some of these social variables in the texture of novels necessarily involves engaging the use of interdisciplinary approach as means of analysis. This implies a blend of appropriate insights from either within linguistics, or those from linguistics with other relevant ideologies from other fields of study in order to extricate the various thematic preoccupations enclosed in the discourse strategies of literary discourses.

The study of discourse strategies in Adichie’s novels, is considered worthwhile and interesting, because of the fact that, the novels, apart from being a form of record- keeping of social realities, they offer a rich corpus for language study in comprehending meaning (Osunbade, 2010). The choice of Adichie’s Purple Hibiscus (2003), Half of a Yellow Sun (2006) and AMERiCANAH (2013) (henceforth referred to as PH, HOAYS, and AH, respectively) is due to the fact that, the novel is still one of the dominant genres in African literary tradition, which has occupied a central position in re-creation and documentation of socio-political experience of African societies by writers (Osunbade, 2010). Furthermore, the choice of Adichie’s novels is influenced by the nature of the language which she deploys in her texts that evolve diverse discourse strategies that balance her high-literary intentions with broad social critique as she lambasts, without sneering or patronising universal human experience in her literary dissections (Peed, 2013).

(19)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

1.2 Statement of research problem

Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s Purple Hibiscus (2003), Half of a Yellow Sun (2006), and AMERiCANAH (2013) which have been chosen for this study have attracted series of scholarly critical analyses. Some of these studies including: Peed (2013), Nwoka (2013), Omakwu (2013), Schulz (2013), Andrade (2012), Wallace (2012), Asoo (2011, 2012), Sugar (2010), Tunca (2009), Shilling (2009), Ogaga (2009), Osunbade (2010), Bryce (2008), Oha (2007) and other literary critiques, have provided insights into some of the salient textual and contextual qualities in these novels. For instance, in an attempt to analyse the poignant themes and motifs in Purple Hibiscus, Tunca (2009) highlights the various connections which Adichie establishes between the violent atmosphere that pervades the home of the novel’s fifteen year old narrator, Kambili Achike, and the climate of fear instilled by the ruthless Military regimes in Nigeria in the late twentieth century; the time the events in Purple Hibiscus unfolded. The focus of some of these critiques is on the metaphors found in Purple Hibiscus. For instance, Tunca (2009) links the metaphor of food in Purple Hibiscus with the concept of abuse and emancipation. He adopts the narrative voice as the basis for his analysis. Some other critiques focus their analytical attention on the metaphor of ‘purple hibiscus’ while others investigate the symbolic nature of ‘blood’ in the novel. From the linguistic perspective, Osundare (2010), for instance, uses insights from various pragmatic models to examine the processes employed by Adichie to enhance explicitness of meaning in the novel. From the feminist perspective, Bryce (2008) explores the patriarchal oppression found in the novel’s narration. Oha (2007), on the other hand, uses insight from critical discourse analysis to explicate the various power relations in Purple Hibiscus, and to comment on the problems of politics, freedom, gender and development within the threshold of governance prevalent in African countries.

Similarly, Adichie’s Half of a Yellow Sun has also undergone a number of critical analytical investigations. For instance, Sugar (2010), in her analysis of HOAYS, observes that the Nigeria’s shifting political climate permeates the novel. Andrade (2012), on the other hand, attempts an intertextual analysis of Half of a Yellow Sun in relation to its narrative style and other levels of connectivity to Chinua Achebe’s narratives, especially the literary bond existing between the novel and Achebe’s Things Fall Apart.

Adichie’s AMERiCANAH has also enjoyed scholarly critical analysis. For instance, in his criticism, Omakwu (2013) considers the novel as a social critique and a

(20)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

dissection of the politics of identity and various other phases of life of individuals in the society. Omakwu (2013: 2) observes further that, ‘what is genus about AMERiCANAH is that almost anyone can find something to relate to in it’. Schulz (2013), on the other hand, submits that the most successful technique employed in the novel is the convoluted interactions between characters which demonstrate Adichie’s sensitivity to the space between people, and the way it ripples with all kinds of invisible forces: physical beauty, economic discrepancy, sexual attraction, intellectual appraisal, guilt, resentment, envy, and need. This embracive treatment of vibrant social issues which are laid bare through the discourse strategies within an intricate but simple linguistic environment that constitute the narrative quality of AMERiCANAH has made Omakwu (2013) to argue further that the issues raised by Adichie in this particular novel undoubtedly appeal to a broader audience than what is obtained in her previous novels.

However, in spite of these attempts, the discourse strategies employed to explicate communicative events in PH (2003), HOAYS (2006) and AH (2013) are yet to be subjected to an in-depth critical investigation to sieve how these evoke various aspects of social solidarity and enhance textual cohesion in the novels. This study, therefore, examines the discourse strategies such as referential/predication, perspectivation, intensification/mitigation, and the lexico-grammatical elements such as repetition/reiteration, collocation, conjunction, ellipsis, and substitution which have illuminated a linguistic system that generate not only social solidarity but, as well as textual cohesion, in the novels.

1.3 Aim and objectives of the study

The aim of this study is to explore the discourse strategies and the lexico- grammatical components that exquisitely evoke social solidarity and enhance textual cohesion in Adichie’s Purple Hibiscus, Half of a Yellow and AMERiCANAH.

Specifically, the objectives of the study include:

i. to identify the discourse strategies used in the novels that evoke social solidarity;

ii. to establish the lexical elements that have enhanced textual cohesion in the novels;

iii. to highlight the grammatical constituents that augment textual cohesion in the novels;

(21)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

iv. to demonstrate the extent to which the identified discourse strategies have not only evoked social solidarity but have encompassed lexical and grammatical elements for textual cohesion in the novels; and

v. to reveal how the textual networks exhibited in the novels are the discursive means that illuminate social solidarity where the novels are produced.

This study undertakes an examination of the above features in the selected novels so as to demonstrate how the choice of lexical and grammatical elements made by Adichie exhibits discourse strategies that have evoked different aspects of social solidarity and enhanced textual cohesion in the narratives. For this reason, the prime concern of this analysis is therefore to highlight two important textual qualities observed in the selected novels. On the one hand, this exploration is intended to explicate how Adichie’s use of discourse strategies, such as referential, perspectivation, intensification and mitigation, have led to the emergence of atypical expressions of individuality and collectivity that designate familial, religious, ethnic, national and cross-national solidarities in the novels.

On the other hand, it is intended to demonstrate how the textual network deployed by Adichie has greatly enhanced lexical and grammatical cohesion in the selected novels.

Consequently, this study intends to highlight how referential domain of personal pronouns employed by Adichie in the novels is not just mere lexical and grammatical options for the sake of textuality or ordinary linguistic instances to ensure sequential relations of the lexical and grammatical structures, but choices made particularly for the conception of individuality and collectivity which Adichie uses to conceive different spheres of social solidarities in the novels. This analysis, therefore, seeks to explain how the form and function of personal pronouns such as ‘I’, ‘you’, ‘we’ and ‘they’, in the expression of individuality and collectivity have either foregrounded or back-grounded facets of social solidarity.

Furthermore, this study reiterates arguments that, if ideology, power, gender, inequality and other social realities manifest from the communicative intentions of characters in texts, then social solidarity, as demonstrated from the textual networks of Adichie’s novels, is also evident from some of the interactive situations that go in textures of texts as well.

In addition, by engaging in an appraisal of Adichie’s novels using interdisciplinary syntheses of Halliday’s Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) with Fairclough’s model of Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) and then complementing these

(22)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

models with relevant principles from Durkheim’s sculpt of social solidarity (SS) as investigative means, this study seeks to amplify interdisciplinary mode of analysis and the renewal of interests in the application of this perspective to extricate linguistic convolutions that generate contentious textual networks in discourses. With interdisciplinary analysis, the textual networks in chosen novels are therefore analysed on the basis of the fact that they are not just simply signifying a world but as representing it with linguistic forms which situate a texture that generates a cohesive linguistic network that evokes social solidarity as the social realities are re-created. Also as Fairclough (1992) suggests, an analysis of this nature cannot be separated from interpretations of social realities of which social solidarity is an important aspect in relation to socio-reality.

The motivation behind the interpretation of Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s Purple Hibiscus (2003), Half of a Yellow Sun (2006) and AMERiCANAH (2013) is therefore not just to explicate linguistic preferences with textual cohesive tendencies but to demonstrate how these lexical and grammatical elements construe discourse strategies with qualities that coalesce to evoke social solidarity.

1.4 Research questions

The aim of this study is to examine the various discourse strategies that evoke various aspects of social solidarity and the lexico-grammatical elements that generate textual cohesion in Adichie’s PH, HOAYS, and AH. Accordingly, analysis of the discourse strategies that have evoked social solidarity and enhanced textual cohesion in the novels is done on the basis of the following questions:

(i) What discourse strategies have been employed by Adichie to evoked social solidarity in Purple Hibiscus [PH]; Half of a Yellow Sun [HOAYS] and AMERiCANAH [AH]?

(ii) How are the persons, objects, phenomena, events, processes and actions that suggest social solidarity named and referred to in Purple Hibiscus [PH], Half of a Yellow Sun [HOAYS] and AMERiCANAH [AH]?

(iii) What are the perspectivational discourse strategies used in Purple Hibiscus [PH], Half of a Yellow Sun [HOAYS] and AMERiCANAH [AH] that stir up facets of social solidarity?

(iv) To what extent have the discourse strategies amplified social solidarity in Purple Hibiscus [PH], Half of a Yellow Sun [HOAYS] and AMERiCANAH [AH]?; and

(23)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

(v) What are the lexical and grammatical elements in PH, HOAYS and AH that augments social solidarity and facilitates textual cohesion in the novels?

1.5 Significance of the study

Language operating in literary discourses has budding re-creative capabilities.

Based on the above premise, the significance of this study therefore lies in its attempts to underline the peculiar discursive styles creative writers, like Adichie, indulged in and the brand of language which emanates from the horde of these atypical lexical and grammatical elements radiating from the diverse discourse strategies used by them to re- create social realities.

Aside from the above, given that this analysis is concerned with how the language resource is exploited in literary discourses in order to capture contextual variables in which social constructs like solidarity sprout, this study becomes relevant; hence, inferences from the analysis of Adichie’s use of language provides valuable discourse clues to critics on how language can be deployed to augment different social variables in the textures of texts. Apparently, this study contributes significantly to upcoming analysis of language aimed at sieving diverse social fibres from the nexus of literary textures.

Providing insights on the discourse strategies employed by Adichie in Purple Hibiscus, Half of a Yellow and AMERiCANAH are not just mere linguistic proxies for the purpose of narration but as significations of vital facets of social realities, such as communication of intentions to signify solidarity. This has made the examination very relevant for further exploration of textures of texts using insights from linguistics.

Furthermore, this study is considered significant due to the analytical attention it has drawn to details, demonstrating how the discourse strategies deployed by writers to re-create social realities, in most cases, generate distinctive textual qualities. This analysis has established that some of the grammatical functions which linguistic elements are made to perform at some particular instance in the textures of literary discourses extend far beyond fulfilment of the rules of basic grammar. Apparently, deductions from this study have the capabilities to incite further probes into how discursive styles deployed in literary texts exhibit a textual character that fore and back-ground diverse shades of linguistic configurations.

Similarly, just as this examination may unbolt new grounds in the use of principles from linguistics for literary criticism, it also possesses indispensable data for

(24)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

social theorists and policy makers whose interest might be on exploiting language to harness group cohesion for nation building. This is so because of the fact that inferences drawn from Adichie’s application of language to signify events, and institutions like the family, the church and government, and to classify characters in her novels into particular social groups with assorted interests which are loaded in their communication of preferences for identification and positioning of ‘self’ and ‘others’, will definitely add value to researches on how language and other interactive nuances in literary textures could be exploited for group cohesion. Adichie’s use of language to designate her characters’ show of solidarity at a slightest opportunity, has the prospects to trigger further researches into the divergent relationships existing between literature and the society; particularly a reconsideration of the contributions of literature to social integration and peaceful co-existence of individuals for unity and effectual steps for nation building. The implications about how individuals use language to show their allegiance to social groups, as demonstrated in Adichie’s novels could be deployed as models for peace-building in crisis situations.

1.6 Rationale for the choice of the novels

The choice of these texts is enthused by the style in which Adichie’s discourse strategies take her readers into emotionally haunting topical expeditions of the multifarious contemporary society; the social fibres such as the family, the church, relationships and other facets of life, which are schemed in the novels through her deployment of the language resource. The textual networks in the novels re-create various episodes like what goes on in the home, in the church, and the society at large;

like the Nigerian civil war and the nasty experiences of migrants who had gone to America and England in search of greener pastures. Reading Adichie’s novels is an experience that takes one into familiar but extraordinary events which unfold in glowing styles in the use of language that elucidate solid textual networks that evoke different social issues like solidarity - a narrative situation that underlines the motivation for the choice of these novels for analysis.

Besides the above, the choice of PH, HOAYS, and AH, is propelled by the fact that these novels have not only won literary awards, courtesy of their demonstration of unique literary feats, but have offered a broad critique on most significant aspects of social life and the application of language in literary tradition. The lexico-grammatical

(25)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

networks in the texture of these novels which explicate socio-realities and expound reference to them as the best novels this generation has ever produced. This analysis is therefore an addition to the stream of analyses that offer useful insights into the various contributions of these novels, especially the implications in the use of language in literature and other spheres of social life.

1.7 Contextualisation of the novels

This section briefly explores the textual qualities that have urged the selection of Adichie’s PH, HOAYS and AH for analysis as discourse. Attempts are made to delineate the various textual and contextual features that have given rise to the discourse strategies and lexico-grammatical system in the textual networks of these novels that propel the analysis of social solidarity and textual cohesion.

1.7.1 Purple Hibiscus [PH]

Adichie’s Purple Hibiscus [PH] is a story about the coming of age of a fifteen year–old Kambili, whose world is circumscribed by the high walls and frangipani trees of her family compound. Her wealthy father, Papa (Brother Eugene Achike), is a philanthropist who is politically and generously active in the community but repressive and fanatically religious at home. He psychologically torments and physically tortures members of his family such that, in spite of his generosity to his community and the church, his family lives in a world full of silence and perpetual fear.

The life of the narrator, Kambili, and that of his brother, Jaja, takes a positive turn at the moment when their father allows them to go and stay with Aunty Ifeoma, a University lecturer, whose house is full of laughter, freedom, and absences from schedules. In Aunty Ifeoma’s house, Kambili and her brother, Jaja, discovers a new kind of shield with love and freedom which is absent in the confines of their father’s compound that is full of schedules and restrictions. While in their aunt’s house, a lot of changes occur in their lives; they have the opportunity of meeting and interacting with their grandfather, Papa Nnukwu, they participate in house chores and Kambili falls in love with a young Catholic priest, Father Amadi. As they return to their father’s house after staying with their aunt for a week, they discover that the kind of life in their so- called Christian home was full of restrictions. This vacation marks a critical moment in the life of Kambili and her brother, Jaja, who become more aware of their environment and have a different kind of feeling towards their family as it once was. Consequently,

(26)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

being unable to cope with their father’s disciplinary outburst, torture and violence in the home, Beatrice, their mother, poisons him and he dies. Jaja takes the blame and is sent to prison. Meanwhile, their aunt, Ifeoma, is unfairly dismissed from her job as a lecturer from the University of Nigeria and has gone to live in America with her family. The story ends, on an optimistic note, almost three years after these events. Kambili, at eighteen years, is more confident than before, while her brother, Jaja, is about to be released from prison. Their mother, Beatrice, having deteriorated psychologically, shows small signs of improvement.

Though Adichie’s Purple Hibiscus focuses on the strained relationship between the first-person narrator, Kambili, her domineering father and a military coup in Nigeria as a backdrop, the issues raised in the novel are topical, as these touch on vital spheres of life that affect man in general. The depiction of her tyrant father allows for some complexity that criticises both British colonialism and traditional patriarchal powers for their influences on the oppression of marginalised groups. This connection is further made between the two as Kambili’s father’s propriety of European values as his English accent is compared to others in the following words: ‘Papa changed his accent when he spoke, sounding British, just as he did when he spoke to Father Benedict. He was gracious, in the eager-to-please way that he always assumed with the religious, especially with the white religious.’ Papa’s devotion to the Catholic faith makes him a subject of discussion in the church on Sundays: ‘Father Benedict talked about… Papa making the biggest donations to Peter’s pence and St. Vincent de Paul. Or Papa paying for the cartons of communion wine, for the new ovens at the convent where Reverend Sisters baked the host, for the new wing of St. Agnes Hospital…’(PH: p.13). With these claims, his material success is seen to go hand-in-hand with his seemingly devout Catholicism and, in this way his; corrupt view of the world becomes entangled with an imposed religion and the workings of capitalism. Papa’s view about Catholicism made him to condemn the young priest as ‘singing in the sermon like a Godless leader of one of these Pentecostal churches that spring up everywhere like mushroom’ (PH: p.37). To him, the young priest is doomed and he urges his family to ‘remember to pray for him’ (PH: p.37).

The setting of the novel, which is Nigeria, is elemental rather than decorative or incidental. The flower ‘Purple Hibiscus’, which is the title of the novel, represents liberty, not exoticism, and symbolises Jaja’s challenge of their father’s tyranny: ‘Jaja’s defiance seems like Aunty Ifeoma’s experimental purple hibiscus: rare, fragrant with undertones

(27)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

of freedom from the one waving green leaves chanted at Government Square after the coup. A freedom to be, to do.’ (PH: p. 278)

The story ends when Jaja is released from detention into the waiting hands of his mother and sister; a sort of family reunion with strong familial bonds.

1.7.2 Half of a Yellow Sun [HOAYS]

Adichie’s HOAYS is about events that occurred in Nigeria between the early and late sixties; a period before and during the Nigerian civil war. The title ‘Half of a Yellow Sun’ [HOAYS] suggests the imagery of the Biafra flag emblem- a sun half way through rising. This fictitious story based on facts is set in the 1960’s in the south eastern part of Nigeria. The story examines events before, during and briefly after the three years of the Nigerian civil war which was fought from 1967 to 1970.The narration switches, in alternation, back and forth in between the present and past spatial periods. The present in the story is about Nigeria’s civil war; the Biafra war that almost tore the country apart.

The past spatial time concerns the events that preceded the Nigerian civil war.

The first and second sets of these characters are the twin sisters, Olanna and Kainene, who are from a wealthy and influential Igbo family residing in Lagos with their parents. Olanna and Kainene are well educated, and each has a very different outlook to life, situations and expectations. Olanna is an intellectual, while Kainene is a business woman who successfully runs the family business. Placed on this scale of consideration is Ugwu, a hardworking and ambitious houseboy who Adichie presents as being highly intelligent. There is also the passionate, ideological Professor Odenigbbo, the Maths lecturer at the University of Nsukka, who becomes Olanna’s husband later in the story.

He is politically and radically minded; he holds an ‘intellectual salon’ in his home with his colleagues, where they debate about the day to day problems of Nigeria and the steps to correct these anomalies. While their parents go on exile as the civil war breaks out, Olanna and her sister, Kainene, engage in different strategies to survive the war hardship.

The story also revolves around Richard Churchill, an English expatriate writer, who is Kainne’s lover. Richard is in love with the country, the culture, and has a feeling of belonging to the Igbo tribe.

Adichie’s Half of a Yellow Sun [HOAYS] is a deeply moving story with complexities of issues which are neatly knitted together. The novel treats issues such as the African culture, the Biafra war with its tensions, violence, starvation, hardship, hatred, tribal loyalty and ethnic allegiance as well as human failure. In spite of these

(28)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

social vices, the novel depicts love and hope for survival. With these issues intricately woven together through the powerful use of language resources, Adichie takes her readers to emotionally haunting, heartfelt, and profound scenes of the sixties in a complex Nigeria, which had to suffer a brutal and savage civil war.

Furthermore, written using the third person narrative techniques, each of the thirty seven chapters in HOAYS gives the reader the perspective of one of the main characters:

Ugwu, Olanna or Richard. The first section of the novel, for instance, is from Ugwu’s point of view. At the beginning of the novel, Ugwu is just 13 years old and has been employed to work as a house boy in Odenibgo’s house, a lecturer with Nigerian University, Nsukka. At the outset of their relationship, Odenigbo tells Ugwu that education is a priority and exploitation cannot be resisted ‘if we don’t have the tools to understand exploitation’ (HOAYS: p.11). Adichie’s Odenigbo is a fighter for human rights who constantly opposed colonialism; yet his Choice of English over Igbo as he speaks, contradicts his views of how full independence may be achieved. The second chapter shifts to Olanna, Odenigbo’s girlfriend, and through her, Adichie extends the bonds of her narration to other typical family issues as well as the influence of colonialism on the corporate society existence in general. She is from a wealthy family whose source of wealth is questionable. Richard, Kainene’s lover and the only white fully developed character is the focal point of chapter three. As a writer, he has interest and wants to research Igbo culture. As events in the narration turn out, he comes to identify himself with the Ibo people and, in him, Adichie gives the part of reporting the atrocities of the Biafra war.

1.7.3 AMERiCANAH [AH]

Adichie’s AMERiCANAH, tells a love story of two teenage Nigerians, Ifemelu and her boyfriend, Obinze, whose lives take different paths when they seek their fortunes in America and England respectively. Ifemelu has gone to Philadelphia in America to continue her postgraduate studies. Some years later, Obinze, too, goes in search of fortunes in Britain. While in America, Ifemelu finds herself confronted with a race conscious society which makes it difficult for her to get even a part-time job. She gets turned away from menial jobs as a waitress, bartender or cashier. Her fellow students speak to her with painful slowness, as if she cannot comprehend Basic English. In class, she is singled out as someone who will intuitively understand the plight of African Americans because of some half-formed beliefs in the nebulous, shared ‘black’

(29)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

consciousness. As events in the novel unfold, Ifemelu starts to blog about her private experiences. Meanwhile, in England, Obinze struggles to get hold of the ever-elusive national security number that will enable him to work legally. The newspapers are full of stories about schools ‘swamped’ by immigrant children and politicians’ attempts to clamp down on asylum seekers. They eventually return to Nigeria and renew their relationship, though Obinze is married to someone else.

What is particularly attractive about Adichie’s novels is the style with which she handles these touching episodes about general human experience. Deep within the crust of her narration, though the stories in the novels are about how things are falling apart in the lives of individuals and how societies are torn apart due largely to conflicting interests, these stories have in them crave for harmony in form of group cohesion. The need for social solidarity is demonstrated in Adichie’s linguistic choices that are laced in a simple, captivating and interesting discursive style with which she uses to recreate facets of relationships that exist in the family, between religious beliefs, countries, races, and historical epoch that occurred so many years before she was even born. This analysis is, therefore, spurred by the vividness, liveliness, and the freshness with which Adichie’s use of language explicates these diverse aspects of life, like social solidarity, in the society.

(30)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

CHAPTER TWO

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

2.0 Introduction

In this section, analyses of some accounts that have advanced arguments in favour of claims that literary discourse use atypical linguistic features are made. Apparently, different accounts providing explanations about the stylistic effects of discourse strategies are explored so as to bring out the quintessence in the application of lexical and grammatical elements that evoke social solidarity and enhance textual cohesion of literary texts. The concept of style is explored as choice, as deviation, and as a contextually determined feature which instigate diverse discursive tactics. These views are analysed to expound insights that language operating in textures of literary texts consists of discourse strategies that generate diverse textual qualities and give credence to different semantic options for interpretation.

2.1 The language of literature

The functions language performs in literature, and the influence of linguistics in literature has been one of the most widely discussed issues in literary criticism in recent times. This is as a result of major developments in both literary practice and in the study of language. It is obvious that since the emergence of the symbolist movement of France, literature has been characterised by linguistic innovations which were hitherto unknown in the earlier periods. At present, language used in literature is said to be typically different, difficult and challenging; it has the capabilities to make considerable demands on the reader and even greater demands on the critic (Jefferson and Robey, 1988). These arguments have made it increasingly difficult for contemporary literary critics to ignore the form and functions of language in literary discourses, especially now that linguistic studies have evolved in a direction that has increased, enormously, its explanatory potentials in literary studies.

The reason why the language used in literature, in particular, has assumed such an important role in literary criticism is not because of a change of direction that has taken place in linguistic studies, but is due largely to the special character of the theory of

(31)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

language which, more than any other reason, is said to be responsible for this development. Such notable contributions are said to have been made by Ferdinand de Saussure in his studies about grammar. The implications of Saussure’s works on contemporary linguistic theories are so powerful that their influence on contemporary literary world is not limited to problems of literary language alone, but have aided the evolution of theories about the nature and organisation of literary discourses as a whole, and as aspects of social and cultural life. For instance, Saussure’s concept of ‘The Linguistic Sign’, is said to have created the basis for structuralism both in linguistics, and as a more broadly based movement of thought in which all forms of social and cultural life are seen to be governed by systems of signs which are either linguistic or analogous to those of language.

Another contribution that has brought the use of linguistic insights in literary studies to prominence was a movement that came into existence in the 1920s, called the Linguistic Circle of Prague, which was founded by Vile’m Mathesius (Bolinger, 1968 and Vachek, 1966). The Linguistic circle of Prague was concerned with the phoneme, concentrated on the exploration of meaningful word order and other dynamic aspects of the sentence (Bolinger, 1968). The Prague School unified the Saussurean theory by reformulating a new literary theory within the framework of linguistics which possessed most of the Saussurean and formalist features. These explorations gave birth to the synchronic study of language, a shift in attention to analysis of the simultaneous relationship existing between the units that constitute meaningful structures in language.

Before now, the concentration was on how language develops, which had been the concern of previous studies conducted in language. Saussure was, however, concerned with both diachronic and synchronic analysis of language. His analysis of language suggested that, the diachronic study of language should not be ignored but rather be mixed with the synchronic surveys for a true and thorough understanding of the concept of language. With these developments, linguists and literary critics became more interested in trying to unravel the mechanism of language, and the implications of these on the social and cultural life.

Furthermore, the emergence of formalism, a literary movement in the 1920s, contributed immensely to the debates about the existence of literary language. This movement, which was spearheaded by unorthodox philologists and students of literature such as Roman Jakobson (a member of Linguistic circle of Prague, whose theory of

(32)

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN

distinctive features of language became popular in linguistics studies at that period), B.

Eichenbaum, Viktor Shklovsky, Boris Thomashevsky, and T. Tynyanov, emphasise a total refit of language of literature as a unique form of discourse, that is characterised by the prominence placed on the medium or perceptibility of the mode of expression. Thus, for the formalist, there exists a language of literature which is not simply a vehicle of communication but a unique form of expression. It is regarded as such in the sense that, the language of literature possesses a distinctive expressive quality that separates it from ordinary everyday language. The formalists observe that, manner in which language functions in literature is such that what may seem as a mere proxy for an object in ordinary language acquires a different linguistic quality and interpretation in the literary environment. Apparently, linguistic elements in literary discourses are, therefore, considered to be autonomous of ordinary everyday language use, and the lexical items, in this respect, are considered as multiple devices at the writer’s disposal to craft a texture for his discourse. The formalists consider language used in literary discourses as been more or less arbitrary assemblage of linguistic devices, and that, the literary language works neither as a vehicle for ideas, a reflection of social reality nor the incarnation of some transcendental truth, but as a mechanism whose functioning could be analysed rather as one could examine a machine (Eagleton, 1983).

These efforts by the formalists were aimed at justifying the independence of literary studies and the transformation of students of literature into something more than second rate ethnographers, historians or philosophers. This was not a simple task; it was not just a matter of accepting one approach in preference to another, but defining the nature of the object to be studied. These attempts provided inspirations that led to identification and differentiation of the language used in literature from other discourses.

These studies have made it clear that out of the many complex sounds that are uttered or written and interpreted by human beings, a large estimate of these communicative elements are said to encode linguistic qualities with lexico-grammatical and semantic properties that align their consideration as literary discourses. These peculiar linguistic elements laced with literary features are then differentiated from the enormous casual communicative events by some literary filtering devices or set rules developed as techniques to filter literary discourses from ordinary communicative events. These sieved literary utterances are then considered as permanent linguistic stock preserved for use in the linguistic networks of texts; apparently becoming linguistic elements in the literary

Discourse Strategies and the Evocation of Solidarity in Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie’s Novels

UNIVERSITY OF IBADAN