Linguistics and Literature: An Academic Paper anchored to the famous

Fowler- Bateson Controversy

By: Mico Benjo V. Novecio

Disputes do not only occur in political or social areas in the society. Sometimes, for
some reason, it even occurs in the academic and scholarly level. Such occurrences give rise to
a deeper understanding of some issues that need attention to appropriately apply in the
scholarly field. In the academe, language and literature had both created several points each do
not coincide although they are related. The Fowler- Bateson controversy which is an
immortalized debate with regards to language and literature (Simpson, 2004) had diverted the
views of both linguists and critics because of the multifaceted ideas they present or propose.
This paper, therefore, aims to give emphasis on the points of quarrel of the said persons.
Generally, this paper will be dumped with several ideas and views concerning the possibility
that linguistics (the study of language) can be a tool in understanding literary texts with the use
of its exiting methods and/or not. Hypothetically, linguistics can actually be a good ally in
understanding literature being said that there is a way this can be bridge and that is through the
application of the mid-discipline called Stylistics (McIntyre, 2012). But before proceeding
further, lets be enlightened with the fundamental issue crumbling to the emergence of the
controversy.
Let us first talk about linguistics and language. Obviously, the aforementioned terms
are inextricably related since language is a system of words, phrases or even signs that people
usually utilize in expressing their mind and at the same time linguistics is the study of how
language works as generally used by people, and the language itself (Merriam Dictionary,
2010). On the other hand, literature (Merriam Dictionary) are works written or even printed
that are considered to be very good and lasting (i.e. books, articles, poems). In this regard we
can probably say that there is a distinct chance of embedding linguistics in literature because
basically, literature being defined above falls directly into the study of linguistics and that is
probably the point of Roger Fowler as mentioned in his arguments during the debate with F.
W. Bateson but not exactly as what stylistic analysis has to say.
Roger Fowler in his arguments being collected later in his essays (Fowler 1971)
during their polemic debate asserted and pushed the commentator Mrs. Vendler wrong that

linguistic students tend to be more objective in analyzing literary text. In this regard, it is
actually agreeable in a way that it is because they study linguistics by which the description
of the study suggests so. They focus more on what the presented words are suggesting in
grammar. It was even substantiated further in the arguments. Fowler (1971) expressed that
linguists may write on literature (1) purely as a linguist for linguistic ends; (2) for critical
motives, using only a selection from his linguistic apparatus; or (3) no differently from the
non-linguist, without appeal to linguistics at all.
Meanwhile, appealing to this assertion was F. W Bateson (1971) saying that it is not
possible for linguistics to co-operate with the study of literature because linguistics is related
to grammar, and grammar in turn scrutinizes each word, say, in a sentence in a paragraph.
Using this kind of method will lose the very essence of a literary text which is subjective. As
further stated by Bateson when words are taken away in the book, all thats left are blank
pages. He had a point because when linguistic knowledge is used in criticizing a literary text
which is objective, the literary ideals of having multiple interpretation will be futile.
Overall, the dispute had continually confused literature and grammar teachers in a way
that they tend to be biased. It is not completely their fault since there has been no vivid
identification on how we can actually incorporate the two without being biased. Thus, teachers
should go over on how to deal with this English problem and lean from it to teach better among
the students.

References:

Simpson, P. (2004). Stylistics: A resource book for students. Routleledge: New Fetter Lane,
London
McIntyre, D. (2012). Linguistics and literature: stylistics as a tool for the literary critic.
University of Huddersfield, UK
Merriam Websters Dictionary (online)
Fowler, R. (1971). The Languages of Literature. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul)