LINGUISTICA E LETTERARIA ANNO XVI 2008 · angle. Don Juan is in love with Raquel, the childless...

EDUCatt - Ente per il Diritto allo Studio Universitario dell’Università Cattolica Largo Gemelli 1, 20123 Milano - tel. 02.72342235 - fax 02.80.53.215

e-mail: [email protected] (produzione)[email protected] (distribuzione)

[email protected] (Redazione della Rivista)web: www.unicatt.it/librario

L’ANALISI LINGUISTICA E LETTERARIAANNO XVI - 2/2008

FACOLTÀ DI SCIENZE LINGUISTICHE E LETTERATURE STRANIERE

ISSN 1122 - 1917

L’ANA

LISI

LING

UIST

ICA

E

LETT

ERAR

IA

22008

2ANNO XVI 2008

L’ANALISI LINGUISTICA E LETTERARIA

FACOLTÀ DI SCIENZE LINGUISTICHE E LETTERATURE STRANIEREUNIVERSITÀ CATTOLICA DEL SACRO CUORE

EDUCATT - UNIVERSITÀ CATTOLICA DEL SACRO CUORE

ISSN 1122 - 1917

CoverALL200802_Mount_Layout 1 08/01/2010 12.14 Pagina 1

VOLUME 2

CoverALL200802.qxp:Layout 1 16-12-2009 14:22 Pagina 4

L’ANALISI LINGUISTICA E LETTERARIAFacoltà di Scienze linguistiche e Letterature straniereUniversità Cattolica del Sacro CuoreAnno XVI - 2/2008ISSN 1122-1917

DirezioneGIUSEPPE BERNARDELLI

LUISA CAMAIORA

SERGIO CIGADA

GIOVANNI GOBBER

Comitato scientificoGIUSEPPE BERNARDELLI - LUISA CAMAIORA - BONA CAMBIAGHI - ARTURO CATTANEO

SERGIO CIGADA - MARIA FRANCA FROLA - ENRICA GALAZZI - GIOVANNI GOBBER

DANTE LIANO - MARGHERITA ULRYCH - MARISA VERNA - SERENA VITALE - MARIA TERESA

ZANOLA

Segreteria di redazioneLAURA BALBIANI - SARAH BIGI - ANNA BONOLA - MARIACRISTINA PEDRAZZINI

VITTORIA PRENCIPE - MARISA VERNA

Pubblicazione realizzata con il contributo PRIN - anno 2006

© 2009 EDUCatt - Ente per il Diritto allo Studio Universitario dell’Università CattolicaLargo Gemelli 1, 20123 Milano - tel. 02.72342235 - fax 02.80.53.215e-mail: [email protected] (produzione); [email protected] (distribuzione); web: www.unicatt.it/librario

Redazione della Rivista: [email protected] - web: www.unicatt.it/librario/all

Questo volume è stato stampato nel mese di dicembre 2009presso la Litografia Solari - Peschiera Borromeo (Milano)

CoverALL200802.qxp:Layout 1 16-12-2009 14:22 Pagina 5

ARGUMENTATION ACROSS CONTRASTS IN

M. DE UNAMUNO’S “TWO MOTHERS”

OLGA CHESNOKOVA

The article deals with the role of contrasts in the argumentative strategies created by theshort novel Dos madres / Two Mothers by the great Spanish writer, poet, philosopher and ed-ucator Miguel de Unamuno (1864-1936).

According to Bakhtin (2002: 39), a novel “is plasticity itself, opening many possibili-ties of dialogicity”. Unamuno’s short novel Two Mothers seems very attractive for reflectingon the argumentation and word meaning, as the collisions of this text suppose and evenpredetermine the interactions in an argumentative dialogue, as there are many contradictoryevents and emotions to be expressed and argued. The short novel Two Mothers belongs toUnamuno’s cycle Tres novelas ejemplares y un prólogo / Three Exemplary Novels and a Pro-logue (1920). As well as his great predecessor and compatriot Miguel de Cervantes Saave-dra, Miguel de Unamuno called his short novels exemplary, as there may be discovered manylessons and much wisdom. Personality, love, suffering, pity, faith, hope, charity, destiny ofSpain – these are constant topics of Unamuno’s writings as a whole, as well as of the ThreeExemplary Novels and a Prologue.

The descriptions of space and time commentaries in these exemplary novels are veryscanty. Still it doesn’t deprive characters of any historical and social authenticity, but, onthe contrary, it makes even more impressive their personalities, the internal reality of theirsouls. The textual organization of Two Mothers includes narrative fragments and theatricaldialogues. The characters are: Don Juan; Raquel, a childless widow; Berta Lapeira, DonJuan’s fiancée and his wife afterward. The plot is based on the “one man - two women” tri-angle. Don Juan is in love with Raquel, the childless widow. Raquel is sterile and to satisfyher gnawing hunger for motherhood she decides to look for a young and healthy fiancée forher beloved Don Juan. It is Berta Lapeira, who according to Raquel, has to become motherof Juan’s child. Berta gives birth to a daughter, who is also named Raquel. Rushing about thetwo women, Juan perishes in an accident. Raquel captures all his possessions and persuadesBerta and her parents to let her have Juan’s daughter. As is shown by Lotman (1970: 357),any artistic text possesses multilayer intertextual relations with other texts. The text Dosmadres / Two Mothers reveals clear allusions to the Old Testament, to Rachel’s Story (Gen-esis 29-30; 35) and to the story of the Two Mothers and King Solomon‘s judgment.

So, the main event of the text is the struggle of two women for Don Juan and for hiswill. The conversations between the characters as well as the narrator’s dialogue with the

L’ANALISI LINGUISTICA E LETTERARIA XVI (2008) 907-916SPECIAL ISSUE: WORD MEANING IN ARGUMENTATIVE DIALOGUE

Cap027ALL_ALL 08/01/2010 13.03 Pagina 907

reader constitute a really inspiring linguistic material for studying word meaning in dialogicinteraction and argumentation.

Reading the text, one may come across numerous expressions of contrasts and oppo-sitions. As far as Unamunian mentality and Spanish mentality on the whole are concerned,as mentioned by Del Rio (1956: 20), “contradiction and conflict have become part of theSpanish being, and Unamuno, well prepared for it by temperament and education, chose tomake of it the center of his spiritual life”.

So, the hypothesis consists in a unique role of the contrasts which originally organizethe text Dos madres / Two Mothers and may be considered as its specific argumentative strat-egy. Therefore, the investigation was aimed at studying contrasts in figures of speech, figuresof thought, arguments and counter-arguments in the text.

In the very beginning of the text we observe the narrator’s reflections on the essenceof the relations between Don Juan and Raquel, where the antonyms vida – muerte / life –death structure their tragic sense:

Su amor era un amor furioso, con sabor a muerte, que buscaba dentro de suhombre, tan dentro de él, que de él se salía, algo de más allá de la vida (43)1 /Her love was a violent love that savored of death, that searched within herman, so very deep within him, that it emerged from him like something be-yond life. (72).

Topics of maternity and paternity are semiotically important for the plot. Kinship termspadre – madre / father – mother are rather frequent in the text. Their opposition in dia-logues and in the narrator’s discourse also structures and aesthetically marks the intrigue. Inthe following segment, we find the opposition of nouns mother – father, in a persuasive dis-course of Raquel addressed to Don Juan, when Raquel, as it is typical for practically all herutterances, justifies her own norms and convinces Juan of the unjustifiable truth of her state-ments. Raquel’s utterances show that she chooses formulations that attribute positive con-notations to their ethically unacceptable content:

Raquel.- <…> Hazte padre, Juan, hazte padre, ya que no has podido hacermemadre (45) / Raquel. <…>Juan, become a father since you have not beenable to make me a mother (75).

Obtaining the results in the argumentative struggles of the characters comes across theirfeelings and emotions, which are complicated and intricate, cf. the narrator’s reflection onthe contradictory emotions, gripping Raquel:

Al decir esto se reía con una risa que parecía a llanto (46) / As she said thisshe laughed; her laugh sounded like a sob (77).

908 OLGA CHESNOKOVA

1 References in Spanish according to Unamuno 1999, in English according to Unamuno 1956, in Russian ac-cording to Unamuno 1981.


In many fragments of the text there can be discovered contrasts based on concepts heaven– hell, angel – devil (demon). In many sequences of the text Berta is being defined as anangel, angelic, while Raquel is called a demon, or demonic:

Y a la hija, a la angelical Berta, un angelito caído le susurró en el silencio dela noche y del sueño, al oído del corazón: “Te teme” (49) / And to their daugh-ter, the angelic Berta, a little fallen angel whispered, speaking to the ear of herheart in the silence of the night and of dreamland: “He fears you” (84).

Berta. ¡Yo no! Esa mujer es un demonio... un demonio que te tiene fasci-nado (62) / Berta. Well, I don’t! That woman is a demon ... a demon whohas fascinated you (112).

As is typical for contrasts and antonyms, they tend to be textually associated. The follow-ing example with the same adjective redentor / redeemer, referring to the opposite concepts,confirms it:

El pobre Juan, ya sin don, temblaba entre las dos mujeres, entre su ángel y sudemonio redentores (51) / Poor Juan, now without the “Don”, trembled be-tween the two women, between his angelic and his demonic redeemer (88).

As is usual for Unamuno’s style, contrasts and opposite word meanings don’t form strictborders, but melt into each other. Thus, arguing the attributes angel – devil locks in the defi-nition fallen angel and Raquel’s attempt to convince Juan of making Berta fall:

Raquel. – Quien sabe...Pero antes dame un hijo...¿Lo oyes? Ahí está la angel-ical Berta Lapeira.¡Angelical! Ja...ja...ja...Don Juan. – ¡Y tú, demoníaca!- gritó el hombre poniéndose en pie y costán-dole tenerse así.Raquel. – El demonio también es un ángel, michino...Don Juan. – Pero un ángel caído.Raquel. – Haz, pues, caer a Berta; ¡hazla caer!(47) / RAQ UEL. Perhaps … But first give me the child ... Do you hear? There youhave the angelic Berta Lapeira, Angel! Ha … ha … ha …DON JUAN. And you, a devil! … (shouting, standing up and struggling to re-main so.)RAQ UEL. The devil is also an angel, darling.DON JUAN. But a fallen angel ...RAQ UEL. Then make Berta fall; make her fall! (80).

The opposition and mutual attraction of the concepts heaven – hell is another verbal man-ifestation of the nerve-strain of the characters and another verbal resource of their argu-mentative strategies. Through this opposition Raquel justifies her actions saying that hell isa sterile womb:

Raquel. – ¿Sabes tú lo que es el cielo? ¿Sabes lo que es el infierno? ¿Sabesdónde está el infierno?

ARGUMENTATION ACROSS CONTRASTS IN M. DE UNAMUNO’S “TWO MOTHERS” 909


Don Juan. – En el centro de la tierra, dicen.Raquel. – O en el centro de un vientre estéril, acaso... (46) /RAQ UEL. Do you know what heaven is? Do you know what hell is? Do youknow where hell is?DON JUAN. They say that in the center of the earth.RAQ UEL. Or perhaps in the center of a sterile womb… (77-78).

As well as it happens with the nouns angel – devil, an analogous example of locking contrastscan be found with the nouns heaven – hell:

Don Juan. – Que eres mi cielo.Raquel. – Ortas veces dices que tu infierno...Don Juan. – Es verdad. (58) / DON JUAN. You are my heaven…RAQ UEL. Sometimes you say that your hell…DON JUAN. That’s so. (103).

The concepts of “body – soul” as the symbols of corporal and spiritual are also opposed in anumber of contexts:

Don Juan. – ¡Mejor, Raquel, mejor! Muerto, sí; muerto de miseria y de po-dredumbre. ¿No esto miseria? ¿No es podredumbre? ¿Es que soy mío? ¿Esque soy yo? ¿Por qué me has robado el cuerpo y el alma? (55) / DON JUAN.It would be better so, Raquel, better! Dead, yes; dead from misery and cor-ruption. Isn’t this misery? Isn’t this corruption? Am I my own master? Whyhave you stolen my body and soul? (97).

Raquel. – ¡Hijo mío, hijo mío, hijo mío...! No te robé yo; me robaste tú elalma, tú, tú! Y me robaste el cuerpo... (56) / RAQ UEL. My child, my child, mychild … I didn’t steal you; it was you who stole my soul, you, you. And youstole my body … (98).

As well as it happens with other contrasts, the concepts and names body – soul are alsolocked. Linguistically, it is the Spanish Phraseological unit en cuerpo y alma, which meanscompletely, entirely, fully:

Y se decía: “Arrancarle ese hombre y ver cómo es el hombre de ella, el hom-bre que ha hecho ella, el que se le ha rendido en cuerpo y alma (51) / Shesaid to herself: “To snatch away this man and see what the man has surren-dered himself to her, body and soul (87).

But not only abstract concepts are being opposed and aesthetically marked in the text. Quitecurrent for every day speech antonymous spatial concepts behind – before are melting intoeach other in the narrator’s comparison of the attitude of the two women towards Juan withthe same sensation of driving him to a perdition:

El pobre Juan, ya sin don, temblaba entre las dos mujeres, entre su ángel y sudemonio redentores. Detrás de sí tenía a Raquel, y delante, a Berta, y ambas

910 OLGA CHESNOKOVA


le empujaban. ¿Hacia dónde? Él pesentía que hasta su perdición. (51) / PoorJuan, now without the “Don”, trembled between the two women, betweenhis angelic and his demonic redeemer. Behind him was Raquel and beforehim Berta, and both were driving him on. Where to? He saw that it wastoward perdition. (88).

A very peculiar pun is based on Spanish antonyms claro – oscuro / clear – dark. The pun isbased on these adjectives’ relation with the concept light and on the Spanish adverbial useof the word claro as a form of agreement. An exasperated Berta repeats claro of Juan’s answerif he really wants to marry her, and immediately adds opposite adjective oscuro, denyingJuan’s expression of agreement and in this way presenting two divergent answers to the samequestion. So, antonyms claro – oscuro become the argument and the counter-argument, re-spectively.

Berta.- ¡Acabáramos! ¿Quieres, pues, casarte conmigo?Don Juan.- ¡Claro!Berta.- ¿Claro? ¡Oscuro!¿Quieres casarte conmigo?Don Juan.- Sí. (54).

Unfortunately, both in the English and Russian translations this delicate pun is lost.

BERTA. Will we ever understand each other – you wish to marry me?DON JUAN. That’s clear!BERTA. Clear? Not so clear! Do you want to marry me?DON JUAN. Yes! (90-91). Берта. Наконец-то! Значит, ты хочешь на мне жениться?Дон Хуан. Ясно!Берта. Ясно? Совсем не ясно! Так ты хочешь на мне жениться? Дон Хуан. Да. (22).

A certain persuasive effect of many dialogue interactions is based on the meaning and sty-listic connotations of the Spanish nouns esposa – mujer / spouse – wife – woman, which,being stylistic synonyms (Moliner 1986, t. 2: 472), make contextual antonyms and alsoserve as argument and counter-argument in the text. Raquel opposes herself to Berta as awoman (a beloved woman of Juan) contrary to Berta, who is his wife or spouse:

Raquel.- Mira, Juan. Dentro de poco, tal vez antes de que os caséis, y en todocaso poco después de vuestra boda, la pequeña fortuna de los padres de Berta,la de tu futura esposa..., esposa, ¿eh?, no mujer, ¡esposa...! la de tu futura es-posa, sería mía..., es decir nuestra... (54-55) / RAQ UEL. Just think, Juan, withina short time, perhaps before you are married, or at any rate a little while afteryour wedding, the small fortune of Berta’s parents, the fortune of your futurespouse… spouse, eh? not wife … spouse! ... the fortune of your future spousewill be mine… or rather, ours… (95).



Sad to say, once again the subtle pun based on the shades of meaning and connotations ofthese names in the original Spanish text is also lost in the existing English and Russian trans-lations:

Raquel. – <...> ¿No soy tu mujer?Don Juan. – Sí, tú eres mi mujer ...Raquel. – Y ella será tu esposa. ¡Esposa!, así dicen los zapateros:“Mi esposa!”Y yo seré tu madre y la madre de vuestro hijo..., de mi hijo (56) / RAQ UEL. <...> Am I not your woman?DON JUAN. Yes, you are my woman …RAQ UEL. And she will be your wife. Woman! as the shoemakers say: “Mywoman!” I will be your mother and the mother of your child… of my child…(98-99) /Ракель. Разве я не твоя жена?Дон Хуан. Да, ты моя жена…Ракель. А она будет твоей супругой. Супругой! Мастеровые так иговорят: «Моя супруга!». И я буду твоей матерью и матерью вашегоребенка…моего ребенка (26).

The grammatical contrast of singular and plural also acquires argumentative force and aes-thetic function. No wonder, that it concerns, for instance, such aesthetically relevant nounsfor the text as amor / love, hombre / man.

Amor-amores. De tal modo, que cuando el pobre náufrago de los amores –que no del amor – recaló en el Puerto de la viuda estéril, alegrándose como deuna ventura del hijo de sus amigos, sin sospechar que aquel Puerto era unPuerto de tormentas (48) / Therefore, when the poor man wrecked by love-affairs, not by love – sighted the port of the sterile widow, they rejoiced at thegood fortune of their friend’s son, without suspecting that that port was astormy one. (82).

Hombre-hombres. Raquel. – <…> ¿Y cómo lleva a Juan?Berta. – Los hombres...Raquel. – ¡No, el hombre, el hombre! (60) / RAQ UEL. <…> How do you get along with Juan?BERTA. Men ...RAQ UEL. No, the man, the man! (107).

Locking contrasts in the text of Two Mothers is well seen in the oxymoron fingimientos sin-ceros / sincere pretensions, in the most common form of oxymoron involving an adjective-noun combination. Oxymoron itself is a figure of speech that combines two normallycontradictory terms. Pretension and sincerity are opposite qualities. They inject a sense ofirony in Raquel’s statement about marriage as a school of sincere pretensions. Raqueldoesn’t appeal to reason. It is an argument to a psychological state of Berta, her commu-nication partner.

912 OLGA CHESNOKOVA


Hay fingimientos muy sinceros. Y el matrimonio es una escuela de ellos (60)/ There are very sincere pretensions. And marriage is their school (106).

All these linguistic data seem to indicate that the text of Two Mothers is organized by a setof oppositions. A very interesting, though non productive phenomenon of word meaning,typical for all languages is enantiоsemy (opposite meanings of the same word).

In the text we find a typical Spanish noun revealing enantiоsemy, namely vencimiento/ victory and defeat (Moliner, 1986, t.2: 1453). The peculiar feature of the Spanish nounvencimiento is that it may be a synonym and an antonym of the noun victoria, depending onthe communicative intention. In the original text it is opposed to the noun victoria, whichbecomes its counter-argument:

Berta, por su parte, sentíase como transportada. ¡Había vencido a Raquel!¡Pero a la vez sentía que tal victoria era un vencimiento! (61) / Berta, on herpart, was in transports. She had conquered Raquel! But she felt that the vic-tory was at the same time a defeat. (110).

Contrasts and oppositions of the text tend to concentration and association. In the fol-lowing segment we discover at least three pairs of oppositions: wife – woman, heaven – helland a very special opposition “For heaven and for me!” that evokes such questions as, for in-stance, what for, according to Raquel, Juan has to become a father and to have a child, whatdoes Raquel literally say, what does she intend to communicate, for whose sake Juan has tobecome a father. The formulation “For heaven and for me!” obscures and mystifies Raquel’sformulations of goals for Juan’s paternity and reveals her manner of persuasion and argu-mentation:

Raquel. – ¿Celos? ¡Mentecato! ¿Pero crees, michino, que puedo sentir celosde tu esposa...? ¿De tu esposa? Y yo, tu mujer...? ¡Para casar y dar gracias a loscasados y que críen hijos para el cielo; para el cielo y para mí!Don Juan. – Que eres mi cielo.Raquel. – Otras veces dices que tu infierno... (58) /DON JUAN. Jealous?RAQ UEL. Jealous? You fool! Do you think, darling, I could be jealous of yourwife?... Of your wife? I, your woman?... For wedlock, to give God’s blessingto married people and to have them bring up children for God’s kingdom!For heaven and for me!DON JUAN. You are my heaven…RAQ UEL. Sometimes you say that your hell…DON JUAN. That’s so. (103).

The Unamunian Raquel is a character of extremely strong will. According to the plot, shehas to persuade and convince other characters of the fairness and correctness of her state-ments, and other people become convinced simply because of the argumentative force ofthese statements. One of their verbal resources is what may be called Fuzziness of Deixis.Thus, possessive pronouns are very active in Raquel’ utterances, but at the same time so



vague, that they permit various interpretations. This fuzziness of deixis, mainly based onpersonal and possessive pronouns, may be interpreted as an argumentative strategy appliedby Raquel:

Raquel. – ¡Claro que digo bien! ¿O es que crees que yo no sé que tu fortuna,como tú todo, no es sino mía, enteramente mía? (44) / RAQ UEL. Of courseit’s right! Or perhaps you think that I don’t know that your fortune, as wellas everything else that’s yours, belongs only to me, entirely to me (74).

Raquel. – ¡Gracias a Dios! ¿No le pregunté si venía acá a buscar la voluntadde Juan? ¡Pues la voluntad de Juan, de nuestro hombre, es ésa, es hacerse padre!Berta. – ¿La suya?Raquel. – Sí, la suya.¡La suya, porque es la mía! (61) /RAQ UEL. Thank God! Didn’t I ask you whether you came here to look forJuan’s will ? Well, the will of our Juan, of our man, is just that to become a fa-ther!BERTA. His?RAQ UEL. Yes, his. His, because it is mine! (108).

In the above quoted examples there are being shaded such items, as whose fortune Juan’s pos-sessions are, whose will Juan’s will is, etc.

Throughout all the text Raquel justifies her own norms. But her statements cause thediscordance of word meaning. It has been already seen in the fuzziness of deixis.

The text has multiple examples of expressions not be interpreted logically. Here aresome of them.

• Juan’s possibility “to give” a child to a sterile widow. Raquel. – ¡Bien!Pero tú puedes darme un hijo. (45) / Raquel. All right! But you can giveme a child. (75).

• Raquel’s intention to make Juan a man and a father: Raquel. – ¡No, noes así! ¡Yo voy a hacerte hombre; yo voy a hacerte padre!

Don Juan. – ¿Tú?Raquel. – ¡ Sí, yo, Juan; yo, Raquel!Juan se sintió como en agonía. (55) / RAQ UEL. No, it is not! I’m going to make a man of you! I’m going to makeyou a father!DON JUAN. You?RAQ UEL. Yes, I, Juan! I, Raquel! (Juan felt the pangs of death.) (96).

• Raquel’s intention to be Juan’s mother and the mother of Juan’schild. Y yo seré tu madre y la madre de vuestro hijo..., de mi hijo(56) / I will be your mother and the mother of your child… of mychild (98-99).

Such expressions show some divergent senses realized by their key words. From the biolog-ical and ethical points of view, Raquel’s utterances are devoid of sense, but from her own

914 OLGA CHESNOKOVA


point of view they just show practical steps of the realization of her plans and don’t appealto reason.

From the point of view of the typology of arguments, this discordance of meaningtakes place in argumenta ab impossibili, argumentum ex silencio, argumenta ad personam,etc. The following example is especially vivid as it doesn’t just show the different characters’interpretations of the word thief (who is the thief: Raquel or Berta?), but also illustrateshow the discordance of meaning coincides with a very frequent figure of speech for con-trasts, antithesis “live like beggars, or on peaceful terms with a thief ”:

Berta. – ¡Ladrona! ¡Ladrona! ¡Ladrona!Raquel. – Ésas son palabras, y no sabes quién le ha robado a quién. Acaso laladrona eres tú...; las ladronas sois vosotras, las de tu condición. Y no quieroque hagáis de mi Quelina, de mi hija, una ladrona, como vosotras... Y ahorapiénsalo bien con tus padres. Piensa si os conviene vivir como mendigos oen paz con la ladrona. (70-71)./BERTA. Thief ! Thief ! Thief !RAQ UEL. Those are mere words, and you don’t know who has robbed whom.Maybe you’re the thief ... all of you, people in your position. I don’t want youto make my Quelina, my daughter, a thief like yourselves … And now talk itover with your parents. See if it would suit you better to live like beggars, oron peaceful terms with a thief ... (130).

To sum up, the antonyms, antithesis, oxymoron, enantiosemy, contrasts based on stylisticsynonyms, the discordance of meaning in different characters’ interpretations form a wholeset of oppositions of the text Two Mothers. These oppositions are oriented to the events andto the emotions.

The text itself and the contrasts artistically represented by Unamuno form a specialand distinctive argumentative strategy and reveal to us the very minute instances of ourspiritual life, the depths of our souls. And one of the infinite manifestations of the humansoul can be seen through their contradictory sides.

An outstanding Russian thinker Mikhail Bakhtin in his famous book Aesthetics of Ver-bal Creativity (1986) stated that any literary text is an open one and enters a dialogue in-teraction with the reader. Bakhtin (1986: 283) also points out that in any society and inany linguistic group there are so called vlastiteli dum / dominant influences, whose linguis-tic choice makes a special impact upon the others. For Spanish mentality Miguel de Una-muno is one of such “dominant influences”.

In Foreign Language Teaching the use of such masterpieces of literary texts, as Dosmadres / Two Mothers by the great Spanish thinker Miguel de Unamuno, in combinationwith the achievements of modern argumentation theory does enrich humanistic approachto Foreign Language Teaching.



References

Bakhtin, Mikhail M. (1986). Estetika slovesnogo tvorchestva [The Aesthetics of Verbal Creativity].Moscow: Iskusstvo.Bakhtin, Mikhail M. (2002). The Dialogic Imagination. Edited by Holquist, M.. Translated byEmerson, C. and Holquist, M.. Austin: University of Texas Press. De Unamuno, Miguel (1956). Two Mothers. In: Unamuno, M. de. Three Exemplary Novels with anIntroduction by Del Rio, A.. Translated by Flores, A.. New York: Grove Press, 69-132.De Unamuno, Miguel (1981). Dve materi. Translated by Stepanov, G.. In: Unamuno, M. de.Izbrannoe. Tom 2. Leningrad: Khudozhestvennaya Literatura, 14-39. De Unamuno, Miguel (1999). Dos madres. In: Unamuno, M. de. Tres novelas ejemplares y unprólogo. Madrid: Alianza Editorial, 43-71.Del Rio, Angel (1956). Introducion. In: Unamuno, M. De. Three Exemplary Novels with anIntroduction by Del Rio, A.. Translated by Flores, A.. New York: Grove Press, 13-33.Lotman, Yuri M. (1970). Struktura khudozhestvennogo teksta [The Structure of the Artistic Text].Moscow: Iskusstvo.Moliner, María (1986). Diccionario de uso del español. 2 Vols. Madrid: Gredos.

916 OLGA CHESNOKOVA


LINGUISTICA E LETTERARIA ANNO XVI 2008 · angle. Don Juan is in love with Raquel, the childless...

Documents

Transcript of LINGUISTICA E LETTERARIA ANNO XVI 2008 · angle. Don Juan is in love with Raquel, the childless...