CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGICAL SCIENCES (ISSN: 2767-3758)
https://masterjournals.com/index.php/crjps
8
VOLUME:
Vol.06 Issue03 2025
10.37547/philological-crjps-06-03-02
RESEARCH ARTICLE
The relationship between the concepts of idiostyle and
idiolect in the projection of the interrelationship between the
meaning of a work and the text that form it
Abduramanova D.V.
Chirchik state Pedagogical university
Received:
03 January 2025
Accepted:
05 February 2025
Published:
11 March 2025
INTRODUCTION
Idiolect is a unique combination of linguistic features and
stylistic devices that serve as a distinctive hallmark of a
particular writer's creativity. This term is often used to
describe the individual linguistic style of an author,
similarly to how a unique artistic technique distinguishes
an artist's works from others. In scholarly literature,
idiolect is also defined as a complex of deep text-
generating factors and consistent characteristics that have
contributed to the creation of specific texts in a particular
sequence.
Idiolect and idio style are interconnected concepts in
literary criticism. Broadly speaking, the following
distinction can be made between them: an author's idiolect
encompasses the entire div of their works, arranged in
chronological order of creation (or in the order established
by the author if the texts were rewritten or revised).
In scholarly literature, there are two key concepts that
describe the relationship between such notions as idiolect
and idio style. The first concept asserts that these two terms
are interconnected, forming both a superficial and deep
structure of a work that reflects the connection between the
meaning of the text and its content. This approach
considers not only the direct direction "idiolect – idio style"
with its own rules of transition, but also the reverse
directions "text – idiolect" and "language – idiolect".
The second line of research focuses on the functional-
dominant approach to the study of idio style, which was
developed in the works of S.T. Zolyan. In these studies, the
dominant is considered a key element that determines the
character of the idio style: "the text factor and the style
characteristic
that
changes
the
usual
functional
relationships between the elements and units of the text.
<...> It is assumed that the idiolect can be described as a
system of interconnected dominants and their functional
areas."
The development of the concept of "linguistic personality"
began in the 1930s and was first described by V.V.
Vinogradov in his studies on the language and stylistics of
Russian literary works. The terms "idio style" and
"idiolect" are interpreted in various ways by scholars and,
depending on this, occupy different positions in the system
of relations with such concepts as language, text, and
"linguistic individuality."
During the same period, in the article by the renowned
ABSTRACT
the relationship between such concepts as idiostyle and idiolect became the topic of research in this article. During the ana lysis,
from the variety of points of view, the main approaches to their interrelation in the process of formation of the m eaning-forming
content of the work and the correlation that determines the author’s personal style were identified.
Keywords:
Idiostyle, idiolect, dominant, text, meaning, chronology.
CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGICAL SCIENCES (ISSN: 2767-3758)
https://masterjournals.com/index.php/crjps
9
philologist and thinker N.S. Trubetskoy titled "On the
Problem of Russian Self-Knowledge", the concept of the
importance of a unified approach to the study of a
particular branch of knowledge—personology—was
presented. Trubetskoy argued that the concept of
"personality" encompasses not only the individual person
but also the entire nation. Within this concept, there is an
interaction between universal human and personal human
individualities. When we talk about universal human
individuality, we refer to polylectal individuality, that is,
the language of the people as a whole, their national
language. On the other hand, personal human individuality,
or idiolectal individuality, involves the study of the unique
state of language for each individual. [pp. 587-588]
According to A.A. Shakhmatov, "the real being has the
language of each individual; the language of a village,
town, region, or nation turns out to be a known scientific
fiction" [p. 591].
The study of the national language, or polylectal
individuality, occupied a central place in linguistics for
many years. However, in recent times, scholars' attention
has shifted toward the study of idiolectal individuality, that
is, the unique individual use of language. In this context,
the concept of idio style, as a key element through which
idiolectal individuality is manifested, has become a subject
of particular interest among linguists.
In recent years, there has been an increased interest in
individual linguistic creativity, which is due to the
abandonment of socialist realism and the recognition of
diversity in literary creativity, authorial style, and other
aspects. Clearly, the focus on individual linguistic style is
logical, as it is formed against the backdrop of worldview
and reflects both unique temporal characteristics (socio-
political, cultural, spiritual) and universal linguistic norms.
Mikhail Panov emphasized that "linguistic personality is
individualization, that is, the manifested state of linguistic
ability of a particular language user in their speech works
(texts)" [p. 587]. A person who masters a language is also
part of a multilingual personality.
In the context of this issue, the question of the scope of the
idiolectal personality and its relationship with the
multilingual personality inevitably arises. Therefore, the
question of the style of individual language takes on a
multifaceted character, which implies the need to use a
multi-aspect approach in analyzing the author’s idio style.
Scholars distinguish two main types of idiolectal
personalities:
•
The normative linguistic personality, which
represents the averaged standard literary norm;
•
The atypical linguistic personality, which deviates
from the generally accepted norms of interpersonal and
intercultural communication.
Thus, in order to determine the unique traits of an
individual's linguistic personality, a thorough analysis of
their texts is necessary. Linguistic individuality has a
complex structure at several levels: communicative,
verbal-semantic, semantic-thesaurus, motivational, ethical,
and emotional, which makes its significance not so much
in reflecting important issues or philosophical and moral
problems, but in the unique linguistic abilities that form the
author's unique verbal-semantic system.
These principles are relevant both for writers and for those
who are not professional writers but also display linguistic
individuality. In this context, anyone who participates in
written communication and demonstrates linguistic
competence can be considered a linguistic (idiolectal)
personality. However, a literary text always stands out with
its unique authorial individuality, and its idiolectal
personality is a unique work of a unique master.
In our time, it can be argued that the concept of "idio style"
is still undergoing a process of formation within the
academic community, which explains the presence of
various interpretations of this term. For example, V. Ivanov
asserts that the twentieth century is marked by the
development of "semiotic games," which leads to the
emergence of multiple language styles by a single author.
However, S.I. Gindin opposes this view, arguing that
behind the variety of speech images in an individual
creator’s work, there always lies a certain "structural
framework of creativity" [p. 1]. Perhaps the initial
definition of the concept, where idio style is described as
the "unchanging personal meaning" [p. 3], is based on a
conceptual foundation.
Therefore, the individual style of the writer finds its
reflection in the unique manner of artistic creation, which
represents a complex of ideologically significant principles
for the author, related to communication and visual
perception, in constructing the text. These principles
determine the selection and harmonious combination of
linguistic elements and stylistic figures. Undoubtedly, the
CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGICAL SCIENCES (ISSN: 2767-3758)
https://masterjournals.com/index.php/crjps
10
concept of individual style also includes the peculiarity of
the associative-sign development of the text, which
influences its structure, functionality, and meaning.
Idio style primarily expresses the personal linguistic style
of the writer, whose creativity embodies a unique
perception of the world through the distinctive use of
language in the artistic space. The features of the author's
individual worldview are manifested at all levels of the
linguistic structure of the text, determining the choice of
language elements that have the greatest activity in
conveying the author's perception of reality and in
implementing the functional direction of the text.
In the world of literary studies, there is still no universally
accepted definition of the key elements of individual style,
nor is there an established terminology necessary for their
description (idio style, individual style, idiolect, stylistic
manner). This allows researchers to choose definitions that
correspond to their personal views on the permissibility of
using these terms in the context of a specific analysis. For
example, the following characteristics can be considered as
the main elements of individual style: "Individual style is
... a structurally unified and internally consistent system of
means and forms of verbal expression" [p. 105]; it is "the
result of selection at the level of verbal expression, i.e., at
the final stage of creativity" [p. 189]; "It is an integrated
structure that arises as a result of applying distinctive
principles of selection, combining, and motivated use of
language elements" [5, pp. 20-21].
Idio style is a unique author's approach to selecting and
processing linguistic tools that create a system of images.
The scientific literature does not offer a clear classification
of methods of interaction and influence between these
tools, which is due to their inexhaustible variety and
numerous combinations. Nevertheless, this unclassifiable
diversity makes the idio style more vivid and unique,
especially
when
the
author's
expressiveness
and
pragmatics play a key role. It is precisely the individuality
and recognizability of the language tools chosen by the
author, reflecting their personal vision of the world, that
constitute the essence of the idio style.
It is important to focus on the levels that shape the style of
the work and reflect the author's unique perception of the
artistic image. First and foremost, this is the level of
linguistic stylistics, where the author selects specific
linguistic elements that are organized in a unique manner,
in comparison to generally accepted language norms and
cultural traditions. Then, we encounter the concept formed
by aesthetic principles, which reflects the author’s unique
perception of the world. This concept includes various
textual elements: the pragmatic situation, compositional
patterns, expressiveness, and rhythmic-syntactic structure.
The interaction of all these aspects generates a unique
system of artistic images that belong specifically to this
creator. Their uniqueness and the diversity of methods of
selection allow one to assert the presence of intertextuality
in their work.
The unique authorial approach enables the reader to
harmoniously
absorb
situational
and
structural
reinterpretations of artistic images that create a unified
authorial and comparative canvas. Thus, the idio style
represents a combination of artistic systems that reflect the
personal-creative strategy, aesthetically derived concept,
and the diversity of functional compositional solutions. As
a result, this leads to a division that separates the
comparative space of a particular writer’s works from
those of their contemporaries, created in the same literary
direction or even similar themes.
REFERENCES
1.
http://www.krugosvet.ru
2.
Abduramanova
D.
V.
DMITRY
YEMETS’IDIOSTYLE IN WORKS OF THE
FANTASY GENRE //Mental Enlightenment
Scientific-Methodological Journal. – 2024. – Т. 5.
– №. 05. – С. 1-11.
3.
Джалалова Р. А. ВАЖНОСТЬ И СИЛА
ПОНЯТИЙ
«ЛЮБОВЬ»,«ДРУЖБА»,«ОТВЕТСТВЕННОС
ТЬ» В ЛЮБОМ, ДАЖЕ В ВОЛШЕБНОМ
МИРЕ //Academic research in educational
sciences. – 2023. – Т. 5. – №. NUU conference 3.
– С. 731-736.
4.
Золян С.Т. К проблеме описания поэтического
идиолекта. – Известия АН СССР. Сер. лит-ры и
языка, т. 45, 1986, № 2
5.
Виноградов,
В.В.
Стилистика.
Теория
поэтической речи. Поэтика / В.В. Виноградов.
– М., 1963
6.
Караулов Ю.Н. Русский язык и языковая
CURRENT RESEARCH JOURNAL OF PHILOLOGICAL SCIENCES (ISSN: 2767-3758)
https://masterjournals.com/index.php/crjps
11
личность. М., 1987
7.
Панов, М.И. Эффективная коммуникация:
история, теория, практика: словарь справочник
/ М.И. Панов. - М.: ООО «Агентство КРПА
Олимп», 2005
8.
Пищальникова, В. А. Проблема идиостиля.
Психолингвистический
аспект
/
В.
А.
Пищальникова. – Барнаул, 1992. – 73 с.
9.
Долинин, К.А. Интерпретация текста / К.А.
Долинин. – М.: Просвещение, 1985.
