Orbis Litterarum 1990, 45,236-241

Transitivity and Agency in Georg Buchner’s Lenz: A Contribution to a Stylistic Analysis David Horton, Manchester Polytechnic, Department of Languages, Manchester, England

Modem stylistics, drawing on recent work in descriptive language study, has developed analytical techniques to demonstrate how structural choices exercised at various linguistic levels indicate the semantic organization of reality in literary texts. This essay considers the contribution of one such principle of organization, that of transitivity and agency, to the conceptualization of experi- ence in Georg Biichner’s narrative k n z . The discussion seeks to identify consistent structural selections made by Biichner at the level of the verb phrase in order to reveal the interaction of syntactic form and literary meaning.

The intensity and startling modernity of Biichner’s prose style in his fragmen- tary narrative Lenz has made this text something of a cardinal work in the development of German fiction. Avant-garde movements from the nineteenth century onwards (naturalism, expressionism, impressionism, surrealism) have claimed the work as a precursor of their own style, and its influence on writers from Gerhart Hauptmann to Volker Braun is by now well-document- ed.’ Given the unmistakable power and originality of the language of the text, its stylistic qualities have inevitably received attention, too, in its critical reception, although they have been systematically explored only in quite recent studies2 Among the linguistic characteristics which feature most prominently in these analyses are Biichner’s extensive use of paratactic syn- tax, verb ellipsis and lexical repetition, indications of free indirect discourse, and the widespread employment of impersonal phrase^.^ This latter feature, the celebrated ubiquity of the indeterminate ‘es’ in verb phrases, is especially prominent in the text, and is consequently mentioned in virtually every analysis of Biichner’s story, commonly being interpreted as the prime indi- cation of the operation of unnamed and sinister external forces upon the mind of the pr~tagonist .~ Little consideration has been given, however, to the relationship between these numerous ‘es’ phrases and the use of verbs in

Transitivity in Biichner ’s “Lenz” 237

the text as a whole. The issue of the type of predications employed by Buchner - particularly in terms of transitivity and agency - is one which has largely been ignored in favour of more clearly foregrounded phenomena, although it proves on closer examination to be a significant (‘marked’) element in the linguistic constitution of the text. More extensive scrutiny of Lenz reveals, in fact, that the ‘es’ phrases are just one component in a consistent pattern of structural choices which underlies the use of verbs in the text.

It is a matter of some self-evidence that verbs are an important constituent of linguistic meaning. Communication would be difficult, if not impossible, without them. Modern stylistics, though, drawing on work in descriptive linguistics, has been able to demonstrate the extent to which structural choices exercised at the level of the verb phrase are a vital element not just of the overt meaning, but also in what Roger Fowler calls the ‘mind style’ of the literary text, as a central indicator of the way in which the writer conceptuali- zes reality and encodes it in linguistic form.5 ‘Transitivity’, M. A. K. Halliday writes, ‘is really the cornerstone of the semantic organization of experience’.6 Consistent selections from the transitivity system of a language signal specific views on the world, particularly on human activity, by casting actions, events and states as different types of processes in predications, and by attributing various semantic roles to the participants in those processes. Analysis of the types of verb and role function chosen by an author can, then, reveal a characteristic perception or interpretation of the interactions among entities and activities in the world. Such relationships are, obviously, an important dimension of textual meaning, for they are arguably the prime device by means of which an author encodes the semantically highly significant matters of agency and responsibility, cause and effect, activity and passivity, volition and compulsion.’ As such, they are crucial in the conception of the fictional universe. In order to facilitate categorization and comparison of these re- lationships, modern linguistics, under the heading of ‘transitivity systems’, ‘role relations’ or ‘case grammar’, has sought to complement the rather empty grammatical definitions of case (subject, object) with more exact semantic ones. Thus a grammatical subject might variously perform as agent, affected participant, senser, experiencer, instrument, force, etc., depending on the process in which it is involved (and the terminology adopted).* Such cate- gories are a useful tool in the analysis of textual processes, since they are able to enhance our understanding of the way in which meanings are produced and

238 David Horton

fictional realities constructed in texts, even if they do not necessarily modify the interpretation of the global meanings of texts which we have reached by other means.9 The following is an attempt to indicate the value of predication analysis for an appreciation of how structural choice contributes to meaning in Biichner’s Lenz. As such it is conceived in the spirit of the stylistic enterprise of mediating between linguistic form on the one hand and literary function on the other.

In the text, the number of verbs in which the protagonist appears in subject position is relatively high at 400 (excluding the relational ‘sein’, which is used very frequently but is not immediately relevant for purposes of transitivity analysis).” This is due to the fact that the text is composed of a series of generally short, paratactically combined clauses (average clause length = 5.85 words) in which the centrality of Lenz is emphasized by the persistent use of the nominative pronoun ‘er’ to the exclusion of any attempt at substitution or elegant variation. The reader is thus locked firmly into a perspective of which Lenz is the focus. Amongst these verbs there is an approximate balance between the transitive and the intransitive (43%:40%), the latter group in- cluding verbs which, while inherently transitive, are used without objects. A closer inspection of the various types of verbs reveals several features of significance with regard to Lenz’s participant role: - the largest group of intransitive verbs is that of motion (87 occurrences). This is linked both to the central conceptual antithesis of stasis and move- ment, passivity (apathy) and dynamism (hyperactivity) in the text, as explored by Hasubek,” and to the concern with spatial orientation/disorientation. This group is dominated, inevitably, by ‘gehen’ (28 occurrences) and ‘kom- men’ (14), and includes the repeated use of verbs like ‘sich sturzen’ (9, ‘rennen’, ‘huschen’ and ‘aufspringen’ (2 each). The motion involved here frequently lacks a specified goal, indicating a lack of destination and purpose. The adverbials ‘auf und ab’, ‘hin und her’ are common, e.g. ‘ging auf und ab’ (7, 30); ‘er sprang auf, ging auf und ab’ (20, 15); ‘er rannte auf und ab’ (22, 18). Lenz’s movement is, then, often aimless. As in all intransitive verbs he is, as subject, semantic agent and affected at one and the same time. - in keeping with the above-mentioned antithesis, there is a relatively large group of verbs of stasis (22 occurrences: ‘sitzen’, ‘liegen’, ‘stehen’, ‘bleiben’, in that order). - another quantitatively significant group is that of speech act verbs (63). The preoccupation with verbal communication in the text (witness the pivotal

Transitivity in Biichner ‘s “Lenz” 239

role of Lenz’s extensive monologue, curiously referred to as the ‘Kunstgespruch ’), and later on with the disintegration of coherent speech on the part of Lenz, is signalled in the extensive locutionary phrases. Broadly speaking, there is a development in Lenz from linguistic control to incompre- hensibility (‘nichts, wie gebrochene Worte’, 23, 27; ‘er hatte das Ende seines Satzes verloren’, 27, 20: see also 24, 16; 24, 19/20; 24, 27/28; 26, 112; 27, 25; 30, 10). As subject of these speech act verbs, Lenz’s role is essentially non- agentive. Indeed, in some classifications of verb processes, speech verbs are included under the heading ‘externalized mental process verbs’ in order to emphasize this fact.’’ - there is, hardly surprisingly in a text which has often been called a ‘psychiatric study’, a high proportion of mental process verbs (73), i.e. verbs of perception, cognition, reaction (‘sehen’, ‘fiihlen’, ‘meinen’, ‘horen’, ‘empf- inden’, in that order). As subject of these verbs, Lenz is even less agentive than in verbs of speech. Rather than as dynamic actor, he appears in these predications as ‘senser’ or ‘processor’ (Halliday). Such processes are clearly inherently self-directed (inward) and do not show any interaction between the protagonist and the external world.. - there is, as noted at the outset, an unexpectedly high frequency and marked distribution of impersonal phrases, which similarly serve to reduce the agent- ive

(a)

role of Lenz. These fall into three major groups:

the use of ‘es war/wurde’ +dative personal pronoun + ‘als’ +subjunctive verb to denote processes of cognition or perception, e.g. ‘Es war ihm als ginge ihm was nach, und als musse ihn was Entsetzliches erreichen, ... als jage der Wahnsinn auf Rossen hinter ihm’ (6, 29f.); ‘es wurde ihm, als hatte ihn was an der Stirn beriihrt’ (10, 32/33). There are 15 instances of this construction in the text. These non-factive phrases indicate, via their use of the impersonal ‘es’ and the dative personal pronoun, processes in which Lenz’s role as recipient rather than agent, as experiencer rather than initiator of thought acts is stressed. There are no genuine acts of cognition or perception in these constructions. Instead, ‘streams of consciousness’ are presented as they occur to the character in a cumulative manner (see, for example, 28, 28-31), suggesting proximity to the charac- ter’s actual experience. These ‘als ob’ predications are used to convey the protagonist’s extended consciousness processes. While the most widely used simple verb of thought in the text, ‘meinen’, introduces short predic-

240 David Horton

ations based around the modal verb ‘miissen’ (e.g. 5, 20; 6 , 6; 10, 28; 27, 20), the ‘es’ phrases often introduce highly fantastic or metaphorical processes which grant access to the visions and delusions which haunt the protagonist (22, 20ff.).

(b) ‘es war/wurde’ +dative pronoun + adjective, e.g. ‘es war ihm alles so klein’ (5, 17); ‘es wurde ihrn .. einsam’ (6, 23), of which there are 16 instances. This usage similarly denotes cognition/perception, though more emphatically than the above group in its lack of subjunctive verb and its use of key adjectives (‘leer’, ‘hohl’, ‘leicht’, ‘heimlich’, ‘unheimlich’). Once again the emphasis is on Lenz as the experiencer of certain perceptions and impressions.

(c) the celebrated use of impersonal constructions to suggest the operation of anonymous external (inexplicable) forces upon Lenz. This technique, evident on some 12 occasions, has been considered one of the most prominent stylistic features of the text. Here the protagonist is absolutely non-agentive and appears as affected participant of processes beyond his control, e.g. ‘riD es ihm in der Brust’ (6, 4); ‘es dringte (in) ihm’ (5, 12; 5, 15; 21, 19; 21, 20); ‘dann zog es weit von ihm’ (6 , 11); ‘die Wande hallten ihm niichtern den Ton nach, daB es zu spotten schien’ (22, 14). These too, of course, are related to the activities of Lenz’s consciousness, betraying an inability to define or grasp pressures which affect him. Grammatically, this ‘es’ remains without reference, evoking the disorien- tation of Lenz’s view of the world. Its suggestive force as an indicator of mental confusion is particularly clear in the example: ‘da trieb es ihn wieder mit unendlicher Gewalt darauf, er zitterte, das Haar straubte ihm fast, bis er es in der ungeheuersten Anspannung erschopfte’ (17, 16ff.). Here the first ‘es’ is of the type commonly found in the text, while the second is inexplicable, as is the reference of ‘darauf. The perceptual unclarity evoked by these grammatical devices is heightened by the fre- quent use of an undefined (‘underlexicalizing’) ‘alles’ in many such phrases.

- there is a relatively high proportion of reflexive verbs (68, i.e. 17%), here understood to include verbs used with preposition and reflexive pronoun, which therefore indicate reflexivity (e.g. ‘in sich wiihlen’). Here the self-

Transitivity in Buchner ’s “Lenz ” 24 1

directed nature of predications involving Lenz - i.e. Lenz’s involvement with himself rather than with anything independent of himself - is at its most obvious. Of these the two largest semantic groups are mental process (33) and motion (21).

- of the transitive verbs in the text, the vast majority do not show Lenz in a truly agentive role, affecting the world around him. Many of them introduce mental (‘fiihlte ... Schmerz’, 12, 2; ‘empfand ... Mitleid’, 12, 10) or other abstract processes (‘fand nichts’, 5 , 17; ‘ausfullen’, 7, 35; 27, 13), reinforcing the impression of extreme inwardness. In a few striking cases, however, namely at rare moments of real determination to take control of his mind, Lenz does become agentive with regard to his mental processes: ‘er hielt sie [die Gedanken] fest’ (8, 4); ‘eine Glut in sich ... wecken’ (21, 19); ‘er ruhrte alles in sich auf‘ (21, 23), etc. These cases are thematically significant, since they show Lenz making a conscious and active attempt to exert a positive influence on his condition. Otherwise, only some 35 verbs in the text (8, 5% of the total) are fully transitive in the sense that they show Lenz as a voluntary and active agent operating on and interacting with some concrete phenomenon external to himself (intentional material and goal-directed pro- cess). In short, in the text as a whole Lenz lacks transitivity almost entirely. In virtually all the verb phrases his role is that of affected (rather than affecting) participant.

- this affected role of Lenz is signalled further, and more explicitly, by the frequent use of constructions in which he figures as the direct object in predications with abstracts as subjects. Here the notion of determinism and violent compulsion comes clearly to the fore. There are some 25 instances of this, involving, for example, the verbs ‘treiben’ (‘ein dunkler Instinkt trieb ihn’, 8, 6; ‘wo eine wahnsinnige Lust ihn trieb’, 22, 36-23, 1); ‘befallen’ (with the subjects ‘Angst’, 9, 17; 27, 19; ‘Grauen’, 22, 35; ‘MiDbehagen’, 26, 8); ‘jagen’ (‘Wahnsinn’, 6, 32; ‘Trieb der geistigen Erhaltung’, 28, 35), etc. Other verbs used in this way are ‘hinreiOen’, ‘packen’, ‘fassen’, ‘zwingen’, all notable for the violence of their reference. The notion of persecution, of Lenz as a helpless participant, is very strong here.

- the emphasis on the protagonist as affected participant is further intensified by the remarkable infrequency of passive forms in the text. Despite a high

242 David Horton

proportion of verbs in the text, the passive transformation is used on only ten occasions, of which no more than three involve Lenz himself (26, 26; 29, 2; 30, 12). In this respect, the verb forms of Lenz display a high degree of variation from a quantitative norm, according to which one would expect a considerably higher ratio of passive to active verbs.13 This studied avoidance of the passive has various consequences:

(a) in instances such as those cited above (‘ein dunkler Instinkt trieb ihn’, etc.) Lenz remains firmly, as affected participant, in the position of direct object following subject and verb. Buchner does not take advantage of one of the most obvious syntactic-semantic functions of the passive, namely the reversal of logical object and subject in their respective clause positions (i.e. ‘er wurde von einem dunklen Instinkt getrieben’). His clear preference for forms which retain Lenz as an accusative direct object intensifies the idea that he is acted upon.

(b) the predominant clause structure of the text, subject-verb-object, remains intact, not disrupted by the transposition of active forms into the passive. The information focus of the syntax in terms of functional sentence perspective (thematization - rhematization) is not altered. Lenz is not ‘fronted’ via the passive transformation, nor is he placed in a position of end-weight. Instead he remains in neutral object position.

(c) the predominant textual function of the passive - the introduction of stylistic variation - is not exploited. The regularity of the syntax is retained.

- the notion of compulsion, of processes completely beyond Lenz’s conscious will, is reinforced by the use of modals. ‘Miissen’ is used on 12 occasions in the sense of ‘Notwendigkeit’, while ‘kiinnen’, used in ten instances but only once in the affirmative, underlines his ineffectuality.

The combination of all of the above-mentioned devices indicating affected- ness, intransitivity and reflexivity produces some of the most characteristic language in the text. Numerous examples could be cited of the way in which Lenz’s disorientation and helplessness are signalled by consistent structural selections at the level of the verb phrase:

Transitivity in Biichner ’s “Lenz ” 243

Es wurde ihm entsetzlich einsam, er war allein, ganz allein, er wollte mit sich sprechen, aber er konnte, er wagte kaum zu atmen, das Biegen seines FuBes tonte wie Donner unter ihm, er muDte sich niedersetzen; es faDte ihn eine namenlose Angst in diesem Nichts, er war im Leeren, er riD sich auf und flog den Abhang hinunter. (6, 23-28)

... aber umsonst, alles finster, nichts, er war sich selbst ein Traum, einzelne Gedanken huschten auf, er hielt sie fest, es war ihm als miisse e r immer “Vater unser” sagen; er konnte sich nicht mehr finden, ein dunkler Instinkt trieb ihn. sich zu retten, er stieD an die Steine, er riD sich mit den Nageln, der Schmerz fing an, ihm das BewuDtsein wiederzugeben, er stiirzte sich in den Brunnstein, aber das Wasser war nicht tief, er patschte darin. (8, 2-10)

Er wuBte nicht mehr, was ihn vorhin so bewegt hatte, es fror ihn, er dachte, er wolle jetzt zu Bette gehen, und er ging kalt und unerschiitterlich durch das unheimliche Dunkel - es war ihm alles leer und hohl, er muDte laufen und ging zu Bette. (22, 30-34)

Significantly, the passage which shows the greatest concentration of genuinely transitive verbs in the text is itself enclosed within an ‘als ob’ construction, and is thus an illusion rather than a real and dynamic activity:

Der Wind klang wie ein Titanenlied, es war ihm, als kiinne er eine ungeheure Faust hinauf in den Himmel ballen und Gott herbeireiDen und zwischen seinen Wolken schleifen; als konnte er die Welt mit den Zlhnen zermalmen und sie dem Schopfer ins Gesicht speien. (22, 19-24)

A short examination of the use of verb phrases involving Lenz shows, then. how consistent structural choices made by Buchner at the level of the predi- cation contribute to an overall pattern. The brevity of the text in question allows a basic quantitative survey of the totality of verbs used, permitting more reliable observations than the kind produced by notoriously selective extract-based criticism. In the above comments the discussion of specific textual examples has been sacrificed to the concern to scan the verb structures of the text as a whole. In this way, the prominence of the much-discussed ‘es’ constructions in the work, apparently striking above all for their unusual frequency (deviation from a quantitative extratextual norm) can be seen to be one in a series of elements which contribute to the establishment of an innertextual norm. The way in which transitivity and agency - or, more precisely, the lack of both-guide our perception of events and participants in the microcosm of the text emerges as an important illustration of the interaction of style and sense, form and function. The extent to which the protagonist is denied genuine agency by the use of intransitive and reflexive

244 David Horton

verbs, by his role as affected participant, senser or experiencer rather than as actor, by the attribution of so many of the processes in the text to an undefined ‘es’, by the variety of means used to signal compulsion, all combine to underline the crucial interpretative implication that Lenz is predominantly acted upon rather than acting. Stylistic analysis of this sort can help to show how the text ‘produces’ on a grammatical and syntactic (rather than on a merely lexical) level the total ineffectuality of Lenz vis-a-vis phenomena and people external to himself: the paranoid entrapment of the hero in the prison- house of his own mind and actions is constituted by verb operations which consistently deny him any interaction with the other. The intensity of focus on Lenz himself, which could also be demonstrated by analysis of other linguistic phenomena in the text, e.g. clause typology and combination, modes of consciousness representation, lexical density, is achieved through the selection of certain syntactic options which constantly refer him back to himself and render his activity goalless. The major thematic extension of this would be that Lenz is a study in abortive self-realization, an analysis of the individual’s attempt to break out of himself by seeking, but tragically failing to find, a meaningful activity in contact with the outside world. Both the attempts and their failure can be read off from the text in the interaction between Lenz and Oberlin. The result of persistent failure in Lenz himself is serious psychic imbalance (schizophrenia).

Is stylistic analysis of this kind merely an unnecessarily laborious method of establishing what is already obvious to practitioners of more traditional modes of literary analysis? Certainly, an approach to the text purely through its formal linguistic properties (if such a thing were indeed possible) would be unlikely to produce a sophisticated global reading of the text. The process of literary interpretation - if we understand by this the explication of the meaning of a text through reasoned and verifiable argument on the basis of rigorous analysis, with regard to considerations of production, form and reception - depends on more than a sensitized awareness of microlinguistic processes and involves attention to the complex social transaction between writer and reader via the text.’‘ Nevertheless, stylistic analysis can play a vital role in this wider translinguistic process by demonstrating rationally and systematically, and by making explicit, how texts produce meanings through their exploitation of related structural options. And it is precisely this demonstration of the relatedness of diverse structural selections - at the levels of grammar, syntax and l e i s - rather than the isolation of individual

Transitivity in Buchner ‘s “Lenz ’’ 245

foregrounded characteristics, which remains the ultimate goal of the stylistic approach to the literary text. An analysis of verb patterns is an important step in the exposition of the overall stylistic coherence of the text, of the ‘connotative synonymy’ of elements which produces an identifiable ‘Stilzug’.’’ Examination of other phenomena would, of course, be needed to reveal the full extent of this interaction - consideration of, for example, the way in which the reader is locked into the perspective of the protagonist by linguistic signals of narrative shift; of lexical restriction, repetition and density; of the principles of accumulation and diffusion in syntax and their contribution to a dislocated conceptualization of reality; of stylistic relationships between the nature passages of the text and those which concern Lenz’s mind; of the protagonist’s disintegrating speech processes - in order to uncover any under- lying principle. The general principle thus exposed would prove a significant element of the narrative strategy and might thus be regarded as an indication of the text’s concerns,I6 namely a highly subjective and idiosyncratic vision characterized by a dangerous hypersensitivity, by a critical imbalance which manifests itself in unpredictable volatility, by utter self-absorption and an inability to exert any self-control. There is, as Stanley Fish has insisted in an incisive assault on the very premises of stylistic criticism, no stable relation- ship between linguistic forms and their meaning.17 However, an examination of the contextual operations of language structures in the finite world of the individual text can suggest, in accordance with the notion of foregrounding, crucial links between form and function.l* Thus conceived, stylistics has more than just an auxiliary role within the enterprise of literary scholarship. It is an integral part of any hermeneutic procedure which seeks to base its argu- ments on verifiable and clearly articulable facts in the text rather than on vague abstractionsfrorn it.

NOTES 1 . The most comprehensive introductions to Buchner’s reception are Dietmar

Goltschnigg’s Materialien zur Rezeptions- und Wirkungsgeschichte Georg Biichners (Kronberg: Skriptor, 1974) and Rezeptions- und Wirkungsgeschichte Georg Biich- ners (Kronberg: Skriptor, 1975). An excellent brief survey is to be found in G. Schaub, Georg Biichner: Lmz. Erlauterungen und Dokurnente (Stuttgart: Re- clam, 1987). On creative Lenz-reception in the GDR see D. Tate, “‘Ewig deutsche Misere”?: GDR Authors and Buchner’s Lenz’, in: Culture and Society in the GDR, ed. G. Bartram and A. Waine (University of Dundee, 1984), pp. 85-99.

246 David Horton

2. Apart from F. Heyn’s unpublished dissertation ‘Die Sprache Georg Biichners’ (Marburg, 1955), the first detailed discussion of the style of Lenz was P. Hasubek’s muchcited ‘Ruhe und Bewegung: Versuch einer Stilanalyse von Georg Biichners Lenz’, in: Germanisch-Romunische Monatsschrift, 19 (1969). 33-59. While useful, this essay is marred by precisely the kind of ‘Konstruktionsnvang’ it castigates in other commentators. Far more perceptive and subtle are R. Pascal, ‘Georg Biich- ner’s Lenz: Style and Message’, in: Oxford German Studies, 9 (1978), 68-83, and R. Thieberger, ‘Lenz lesend’, in: Georg Eiichner-Jahrbuch 3/1983 (1984), 43-75. Excellent sections on the linguistic characteristics of the text are provided in R. Thieberger. Georg Biichner: Lenz (Frankfurt: Diesterweg, 1985) and K. Hassel- bach, Georg Biichner: Lenz. Interpretation (Miinchen: Oldenbourg, 1986). See my review of these two studies in: Modern Language Review, 84 (1989), 241-42.

3. On the syntax of Lenz see Thieberger, ‘Lenz lesend’. W. Hiillerer was the first to explore forms of ‘erlebte Rede’ in the text in his Zwischen Klassik und Moderne (Stuttgart: Klett, 1958), and more detailed consideration is given to this central device by Pascal. I have discussed these issues in my ‘Modes of Consciousness Representation in Biichner’s Lenz’, in: German Life and Letters, 43 (1989), 34-48. On the use of the impersonal ‘es’ see Heyn, p. 54f. and Thieberger, Georg Biichner: Lenz, p. 40ff.

4. M. Benn’s view might be quoted as typical here: ‘Like all of Biichner’s heroes, Lenz has virtually no volitional freedom, he is under the curse of necessity, he is driven by forces beyond his control and beyond his understanding (hence the frequency in the Novelle of expressions like ‘es trieb ihn’, ‘es driingte ihn’), The Drama of Revolt: A Critical Study of Georg Biichner (Cambridge: University Press, 1976), p. 207.

5. Fowler discusses the term ‘mind style’ in Linguistics and the Novel (London: Methuen, 1977), and defines it succinctly in: Linguistic Criticism (Oxford: Univer- sity Press, 1986) as ‘the world-view of an author, or a narrator, or a character, constituted by the ideational structure of the text’ (p. 150).

6. M. A. K. Halliday, ‘Linguistic Function and Literary Style: An Enquiry into William Golding’s The Inheritors’, in: D. Freeman (ed)., Essays in Modern Stylistics (London: Methuen, 1981), p. 354.

7. ‘Transitivity is the set of options whereby the speaker encodes his experience of the processes of the external world, and of the internal world of his own consciousness, together with the participants in these processes and their attendant circumstances; and it embodies a very basic distinction of processes into two types, those that are regarded as due to a n external cause, an agency other than the person or object involved, and those that are not’ (Halliday, ‘Linguistic Function and Liter- ary Style’, p. 354).

8. Lucid accounts of this area of linguistics are M. A. K. Halliday, Introduction to Functional Grammar (London: Arnold, 1985); E. C. Traugott and M . L. Pratt, Linguistics for Students of Literature (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1980); M. Berry, Introduction to Systemic Linguistics (London: Batsford, 1975). A concise overview of the phenomenon in German is provided in Duden: Grammatik der deutschen Gegenwartssprache (Mannheim: Bibliographisches Institut, 1984).

9. The classic example of transitivity analysis applied to a literary text is provided by Halliday himself (note 6 above). Other useful illustrations are to be found in Fowler, Linguistic Criticism, pp. 156-67; C . Kennedy, ‘Systemic Grammar and its

Transitivity in Buchner ’s “Lenz” 247

Use in Literary Analysis’, in: Language and Literature: An Introductory Reader in Stylistics, ed. R. Carter (London: Allen and Unwin, 1982), pp. 83-99; D. Burton, ‘Through Glass Darkly: Through Dark Glasses’, ibid. pp. 195-214. The broader issue of the ultimate contribution of stylistics to literary study is beyond the scope of the present discussion, but will be referred to again later.

10. The edition of the text used for the purposes of this study is Georg Biichner: Lenz (Studienausgabe), ed. H. Gersch (Stuttgart: Reclam, 1984). References are to page and line number, separated by a comma.

11. Hasubek, pp. 36-53. 12. E.g. Halliday, ‘Linguistic Function and Literary Style’, p. 346; Burton, p. 195ff. 13. According to Duden Grammatik, the norm in contemporary German stands at

93% active to 7% passive forms. 14. For a comprehensive discussion of the place of linguistic analysis in literary study,

see W. Fleischer, ‘fher Moglichkeiten und Grenzen linguisticher Untersuchungen literarischer Werke’, in: Linguistische Studien, Reihe A, Heft 50, 1-39; R. Pearce, Literary Texts: The Application of Linguistic Theory to Literary Discourse (Bir- mingham: University Press, 1977).

15. The concept of the ‘Stilzug’ is central in German work on stylistics. See H. Graubner, ‘Stilistik’, in: Grundziige der Literutur- und Sprachwissenschuft, ed. H. L. Arnold (Miinchen: dtv, 1973), pp. 164-187: ‘In dem Begriff des Stilzugs, semantisch definiert als konnotative Synonymie verschiedener Stilelemente, ersch- eint das entscheidende Verbindungsglied zwischen dem strukturalen und dem funktionalen Ansatz der Stilistik’ (p. 185). An English definition is provided by Pearce, p. 89: ‘The analysis or interpretation of the work of literature must recognize and attribute meaning to certain specific details and classes of detail in the text such that the interpretations thereby formulated can be synthesized into a description of meaningful organizing principles of a high degree of generality and comprehensiveness. The text as a whole becomes more understandable as it is demonstrated how particular selections or tendencies in one area reinforce those in other areas and how these together create the unique coherence of the text’.

16. See J. M. Ellis, The Theory of Literary Criticism: A Logical Analysis (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1974) for a detailed account of this procedure.

17. Stanley Fish, ‘What Is Stylistics and Why are They Saying Such Terrible Things About It?, in: Freeman, pp. 53-78.

18. On foregrounding see Halliday, ‘Linguistic Function and Literary Style’, and G. Leech and M. Short, Style in Fiction: A Linguistic Introduction to the Study of English Fiction (London: Longman, 1981).

David Horton. Born 1954. PhD. Senior Lecturer in German Studies, Manchester Polytechnic. Author of Grubbe und sein Verhultnis zur Tradition (1 98 1) and articles on various aspects of modem German drama and short prose fiction.