How Does Duffy And Pugh Explore The Limitations Of Language
“What connections have you found between the ways Duffy and Pugh explore the power and limitations of language? In your response you must include detailed critical discussion of at least two of Duffy’s poems.”
Duffy explores the “power of words” in being able to translate as well as influence complex emotions and thoughts, thus reflecting on the possibilities of language. She addresses the elusive nature of meaning, which –although expressed uniformly through language-is also restricted in being unable to fully interpret that which it describes by confining meaning to words, which “stumble” clumsily. Therefore words are the only means at her disposal as “the common counters of experience”1. in Duffy criticizes the inadequacy of language that cannot “translate” itself in “River”, as it is often the imaginative response to “words” which gives them meaning as oppose to the words themselves. She manipulates language to show both how it can be used to alter the reader’s perspective in “A Healthy Meal”-but also to testify to the magical, transformative power of words, as in “Dear Norman” the speaker turns the …show more content…
“the newspaper boy into a diver/for pearls”. Both Duffy and Pugh in “River” and “Shoni Onions” establish the unity that results in having a common language but Duffy also explores how disparities in language extinguish means for communicating.
“River” explores the inability of words to convey experiences. The “water crosses the border”-which illustrates how a river can cross physical borders and barriers and is not limited by the constraints of language in doing so as it “translates itself”. In this sense nature doesn’t need words as it functions fluidly of its own accord, whereas “words stumble” and fail in fulfilling their purpose of truly identifying the world around us. The hard consonant ‘b’ emphasizes their clumsiness. What’s more, the use of enjambment “A sign/in a new language” is suggestive of the disorientation and confusion that the “babble” of language can create whilst also making the poem’s structure characteristic of the flow of a river. In contrast, in Shoni Onions Pugh uses enjambment “that was the one half of a code/between old neighbors” to emphasize how valuable language is in uniting people and cultures.
Viewpoint and style changes with the stanzas. The first two stanzas seem to be from the perspective of the speaker who sees “A woman/ on the path by the river”, whilst in the third stanza Duffy addresses “you”-as the reader-directly. Forcing the reader to identify with the scene, it seems as if they are “dangling” their “own hands in the river”. Further on, the poem describes the woman and helps us to empathize with her as “she is somewhere else, intensely, simply...” Thus by using language to form different styles and viewpoints-Duffy seems to be referring to the ability that language has in uniting people-this being the speaker, the woman and the reader.
In the second stanza a woman tries to “name’ a bird, however this bird remains the same irrespective of the language used to associate with its existence, whilst the caesura between “name, after” suggests that the bird’s name is not as significant as its “singing”. A “clue” is often given as to what word to fill in a space in a crossword, which may signify that the use of words is like a game or perhaps we use words to fill in the empty spaces in our knowledge of things we see. However “clue” also means to inform someone of something and the unknown woman uses “strange sounds” to do so, thus the speaker cannot interpret these souds. These sounds may simply be in another language, and this signposts how not being familiar with a language disables us, if we restrict ourselves to the boxes in which we place words (like in a crossword)-which are all disorganized and lack any true meaning without any context in the real world.
Preserving the flower, which is pressed “carefully between pages of words” is an interesting way of showing how such an action, following the sensory experience of a “red flower”, can be relived without the use of words to write down such memories-and the flower itself is a much better memory than words which describe it as the beauty of the flower can be appreciated without notwithstanding.
Similarly the question in stanza 3 invites the reader to concentrate on the actual experience of things rather than considering how to construe them by naming them. We are able to derive “meanings” from sensory details in a much more direct way, just as the river flows “until it runs into the sea”, maintaining this path despite the “different babble” it comes across-like a word search which a jumble of words-but words “in the sand” would merely be washed away and
“vanish”.
Seeing as language is a code used to articulate our experience, and this code isn’t the only way to do so-essentially communicating with others may be more important and there are other ways of doing so. Even though the speaker doesn’t understand the “nonsense” the woman speaks, they are able to empathize with her feelings, hence the repetition of “smiling”. Despite being able to understand the woman’s words, the speaker can understand her emotions notwithstanding and thus the woman has communicated successfully.
Flowing water is clean and provides for life such as “fish” however standing water is stagnant and can cause illness. Correspondingly, disparities in language can result in a standstill in terms of communication. Moreover this hints that maintaining brevity restricts our physical and metaphorical movement despite its intended purpose of allowing us to communicate efficiently. Furthermore the importance of not just words, but “ the meanings of things”, for writers and poets is emphasized as it affects our life considerably.
Imagery of the “blue and silver fish” that “dart away over stone, stoon, stein, like the meaning of things” reiterates the idea that meaning expressed through language is elusive and protean. What’s more the system of language used to signify something varies in different languages, but essentially they all mean the same thing. The similarity of spelling “stone” in three different languages as well as their alliteration emphasizes the poet’s point. Although highlighting the difficulties presented by language, Duffy stresses the possibilities offered by words. For example, they enable the woman to feel as though she is “somewhere else” as “because of words” she is transported to “The Other Country”.
This is encompassed in her collection “The Other Country” as words portray how we connect to this “Other” place that could be representative of: our imagination; past; the metamorphosis and changes we undergo as humans with the passing of time. The title is highly significant-both deliberately ambiguous and curiously definitive. It acts as a cohering force, bringing a range of issues in one’s own country into sharp focus while simultaneously suggesting that the “other country” may be a preferable place to inhabit. Using “The” universalizes the experience of migrating to such a place, creating a sense of familiarity suggesting that this place is visited often in the persona’s imagination.
Flowing water is clean and provides for life such as “fish” however standing water is stagnant and can cause illness. Correspondingly, disparities in language can result in a standstill in terms of communication. Moreover this hints that maintaining brevity restricts our physical and metaphorical movement despite its intended purpose of allowing us to communicate efficiently. Furthermore the importance of not just words, but “ the meanings of things”, for writers and poets is emphasized as it affects our life considerably. As a result we are left with a question. The idea of writing a “postcard” is connected with brevity and, often, writing from a new place or country in order to be able to share experiences with another person. The whole problem of the relationship between experience and articulation is presented in the image of an estuary. An ambiguity is maintained throughout as although this is a place where the river becomes “translated” into the Sea, it’s possible that it’s reflective of how words can be lost among other words and thus meaning is protean as it is “at the turn of the river” that “the language changes”.
Unlike the changing, irregular structure of “River”-in “Shoni Onions” there is a regular structure of three stanzas each consisting of six lines. Possibly, this reflects the regularity od the
Duffy explores the “power of words” in being able to translate as well as influence complex emotions and thoughts, thus reflecting on the possibilities of language. She addresses the elusive nature of meaning, which –although expressed uniformly through language-is also restricted in being unable to fully interpret that which it describes by confining meaning to words, which “stumble” clumsily. Therefore words are the only means at her disposal as “the common counters of experience”1. in Duffy criticizes the inadequacy of language that cannot “translate” itself in “River”, as it is often the imaginative response to “words” which gives them meaning as oppose to the words themselves. She manipulates language to show both how it can be used to alter the reader’s perspective in “A Healthy Meal”-but also to testify to the magical, transformative power of words, as in “Dear Norman” the speaker turns the …show more content…
“the newspaper boy into a diver/for pearls”. Both Duffy and Pugh in “River” and “Shoni Onions” establish the unity that results in having a common language but Duffy also explores how disparities in language extinguish means for communicating.
“River” explores the inability of words to convey experiences. The “water crosses the border”-which illustrates how a river can cross physical borders and barriers and is not limited by the constraints of language in doing so as it “translates itself”. In this sense nature doesn’t need words as it functions fluidly of its own accord, whereas “words stumble” and fail in fulfilling their purpose of truly identifying the world around us. The hard consonant ‘b’ emphasizes their clumsiness. What’s more, the use of enjambment “A sign/in a new language” is suggestive of the disorientation and confusion that the “babble” of language can create whilst also making the poem’s structure characteristic of the flow of a river. In contrast, in Shoni Onions Pugh uses enjambment “that was the one half of a code/between old neighbors” to emphasize how valuable language is in uniting people and cultures.
Viewpoint and style changes with the stanzas. The first two stanzas seem to be from the perspective of the speaker who sees “A woman/ on the path by the river”, whilst in the third stanza Duffy addresses “you”-as the reader-directly. Forcing the reader to identify with the scene, it seems as if they are “dangling” their “own hands in the river”. Further on, the poem describes the woman and helps us to empathize with her as “she is somewhere else, intensely, simply...” Thus by using language to form different styles and viewpoints-Duffy seems to be referring to the ability that language has in uniting people-this being the speaker, the woman and the reader.
In the second stanza a woman tries to “name’ a bird, however this bird remains the same irrespective of the language used to associate with its existence, whilst the caesura between “name, after” suggests that the bird’s name is not as significant as its “singing”. A “clue” is often given as to what word to fill in a space in a crossword, which may signify that the use of words is like a game or perhaps we use words to fill in the empty spaces in our knowledge of things we see. However “clue” also means to inform someone of something and the unknown woman uses “strange sounds” to do so, thus the speaker cannot interpret these souds. These sounds may simply be in another language, and this signposts how not being familiar with a language disables us, if we restrict ourselves to the boxes in which we place words (like in a crossword)-which are all disorganized and lack any true meaning without any context in the real world.
Preserving the flower, which is pressed “carefully between pages of words” is an interesting way of showing how such an action, following the sensory experience of a “red flower”, can be relived without the use of words to write down such memories-and the flower itself is a much better memory than words which describe it as the beauty of the flower can be appreciated without notwithstanding.
Similarly the question in stanza 3 invites the reader to concentrate on the actual experience of things rather than considering how to construe them by naming them. We are able to derive “meanings” from sensory details in a much more direct way, just as the river flows “until it runs into the sea”, maintaining this path despite the “different babble” it comes across-like a word search which a jumble of words-but words “in the sand” would merely be washed away and
“vanish”.
Seeing as language is a code used to articulate our experience, and this code isn’t the only way to do so-essentially communicating with others may be more important and there are other ways of doing so. Even though the speaker doesn’t understand the “nonsense” the woman speaks, they are able to empathize with her feelings, hence the repetition of “smiling”. Despite being able to understand the woman’s words, the speaker can understand her emotions notwithstanding and thus the woman has communicated successfully.
Flowing water is clean and provides for life such as “fish” however standing water is stagnant and can cause illness. Correspondingly, disparities in language can result in a standstill in terms of communication. Moreover this hints that maintaining brevity restricts our physical and metaphorical movement despite its intended purpose of allowing us to communicate efficiently. Furthermore the importance of not just words, but “ the meanings of things”, for writers and poets is emphasized as it affects our life considerably.
Imagery of the “blue and silver fish” that “dart away over stone, stoon, stein, like the meaning of things” reiterates the idea that meaning expressed through language is elusive and protean. What’s more the system of language used to signify something varies in different languages, but essentially they all mean the same thing. The similarity of spelling “stone” in three different languages as well as their alliteration emphasizes the poet’s point. Although highlighting the difficulties presented by language, Duffy stresses the possibilities offered by words. For example, they enable the woman to feel as though she is “somewhere else” as “because of words” she is transported to “The Other Country”.
This is encompassed in her collection “The Other Country” as words portray how we connect to this “Other” place that could be representative of: our imagination; past; the metamorphosis and changes we undergo as humans with the passing of time. The title is highly significant-both deliberately ambiguous and curiously definitive. It acts as a cohering force, bringing a range of issues in one’s own country into sharp focus while simultaneously suggesting that the “other country” may be a preferable place to inhabit. Using “The” universalizes the experience of migrating to such a place, creating a sense of familiarity suggesting that this place is visited often in the persona’s imagination.
Flowing water is clean and provides for life such as “fish” however standing water is stagnant and can cause illness. Correspondingly, disparities in language can result in a standstill in terms of communication. Moreover this hints that maintaining brevity restricts our physical and metaphorical movement despite its intended purpose of allowing us to communicate efficiently. Furthermore the importance of not just words, but “ the meanings of things”, for writers and poets is emphasized as it affects our life considerably. As a result we are left with a question. The idea of writing a “postcard” is connected with brevity and, often, writing from a new place or country in order to be able to share experiences with another person. The whole problem of the relationship between experience and articulation is presented in the image of an estuary. An ambiguity is maintained throughout as although this is a place where the river becomes “translated” into the Sea, it’s possible that it’s reflective of how words can be lost among other words and thus meaning is protean as it is “at the turn of the river” that “the language changes”.
Unlike the changing, irregular structure of “River”-in “Shoni Onions” there is a regular structure of three stanzas each consisting of six lines. Possibly, this reflects the regularity od the