William Shakespeare 's The Duchess Of Malfi

        It may appear that anything could be twisted into a typological pattern. Such interpretations appear to suffer from the structuralist faults of skating too lightly over actual texts, ignoring details that cannot be forced into a preconceived mold, and robbing narratives of their concrete shapes through abstraction. I would stress that there is more to Shakespeare than typology, but I would also insist that typology is often an important part of his drama. To make this claim plausible, however, requires more detailed attention to the text of his plays. In what follows, I will call attention to the textual and dramatic details that justify a typological reading of

The use of descriptive language is important for the writer to entertain, persuade and teleport the reader into their work. Descriptive use and imagery allow the reader to experience the setting, sound, taste, and mood as if they can live through it. Which takes us to Shakespeare's play Hamlet. Not only does he use exceptional details and imagery throughout the play between the characters, but the way he uses word allows us to put ourselves into the play as if we can feel what they feel. It also allows us to experience and go through the play as if we are in it also. So in this paper, I would like to focus on a few major moments where I believe Shakespeare descriptive language is the strongest.

Ferdinand’s incestuous behaviour towards the duchess follows the similar pattern pointed above ,i.e., Ferdinand’s aim is not the achievement of sexual relations with his sister. One may like to contest this reading by highlighting Ferdinand’s highly erotic language for

Shakespeare was very specific, in 1603, about his choice of words when he wrote the play, “Othello”. The three language devices – “words as power”, “words as character” and “words as conversation” with the audience – are used to create characters’ identities and fates, and also to drive the plot of the play (Krieger, 2012).

The differences in styles of language truly brings alive the plays' various characters, from the lowliest drawer to the noblest knight. The playwright's audience would have been composed of a similarly diverse spectrum of society, from the groundlings at the foot of the stage, to the members of the court in attendance, and these disparate members of the audience might very well have come away from the plays with different interpretations of

The focus of this paper will be to compare and contrast the works of two playwrights. The works that will be considered are Molière’s The Would-Be Gentleman and Beaumarchais’s The Marriage of Figaro. Both considered comedies, Moliere’s is a short play that tells the tale of Monsieur Jourdain, a tradesman who desires to become a gentleman. Beaumarchais’s play, second in the Figaro trilogy, follows the series of event prior to Figaro’s wedding. Figaro and his companions scheme to ensure that his marriage occurs smoothly. Furthermore, the plays are dated 100 years apart from each other, and they deal with the representation of social hierarchy, social mobility, and gender roles in various ways. With that in mind, they become good sources to compare and contrast the changes in society that occurred within those 100 years. This paper will compare both plays to examine how Molière further endorses the social values and ideas of his time, while Beaumarchais’s presents a shift in attitude towards those values and challenges them.

In Chaucer’s “Franklin Tale” the plot revolves around a married couple: the knight, Arviragus, his young wife, Dorigen, and a young squire, Aurelius who importunes and attempts to Dorigen. The characters can be said to oscillate between desire and their ego honor which affects what they say and do. Lacan’s definition of desire tells us that we desire for recognition from this “Other.” Our desire is to become what the other person lacks. Duby’s model of courtly love is a concept that focuses on chivalry, nobility and women being at the center. In this paper, I will examine what the story reveals about the relation each character has to his or her desire, how they act in accordance to their desire and the role magic or illusion plays in the plot and how it affect characters’ relation to desire.

Sophocles and Shakespeare were both literary artists that published works still respected and relevant centuries later. The unique language of historical literature assists in their interpretation and their contrast to modern texts. The masterful wielding of language, diction, and metaphor contributes to various aspects of their work, adding both elements of drama and irony. The manipulation of speech seen through various characters such as Teiresias, Oedipus, Margaret, Richmond and Anne plays a substantial and crucial role in the development of their respective plays. These roles include the juxtaposition of the characters’ attributes with one another as well as providing important context and background information.

Shakespeare uses a variety of linguistic devices and dramatic techniques for character development from Act 2 Scene 2 to Scene 4. We see Angelo’s precise, business-like persona transform to temptation, and final cruelty whilst we see the true, confident side of Isabella as as she attempts to convince Angelo to reverse his judgement, but eventually loses her ignorant hope on the realisation of his true ‘purpose’.

In Shakespeare’s play, Twelfth Night or What you Will, the characters are involved in a plot complete with trickery, disguise, and love. Each character is defined not by his or her gender or true identity, but by the role they are forced to take because of the complicated situation that arises. Unlike their gender, the speech the characters give an insight to their true personalities. In the Twelfth Night, the character Duke Orsino uses flowery and over-dramatic language, long poetic sentence structure, and melodramatic metaphors to display his overemotional romantic nature despite the different emotions in his various speeches.

Literary devices are frequently used throughout acts four and five of Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice. Some of the most prominent devices used on TMOF are dramatic irony, allusion and symbolism. These devices help further develop theme ingrained in the story such as marriage, deceive, wealth, and religion. The use of literary devices helps ensure the story transitions smoothly and is pleasant to the reader, it might also help in the comprehension of the story´s characters.

The passage to be studied is from Act 3, scene1, from the play, ‘The Duchess of Malfi’. The importance of this passage, and where it fits into the play, is explained in the first paragraph. The following paragraph will highlight some of the distinctive features of its language, starting with the beginning of the passage and comparing it to the end of the passage. The analysis of the text will cover rhythm, sounds, punctuation, repetition, alliteration, enjambment and caesura. Using these techniques Webster helps the reader to extract meaning, characterisation and the themes of the play. Finally, the third paragraph will show how the distinctive features of the language can be translated into performance using lighting, tone of voice, props, costume, sound and space. The language used in the text of the play is the source to its meaning and performance.

Shakespeare’s work is among the hardest to read because of its supposed complexity and sophistication. The language used in the Early Modern Era is different than that of the Post Modern Era. Audiences that saw the performances were aural learners and were able to pinpoint certain tones and facial expressions that readers may not detect through words. Watching the plays performed provided better feedback than readings do (Palfrey 10-11). Metaphors, implicit or explicit, are figures of speech that help compare two unlike things and are not designed for literal intake. Yet, with Shakespeare’s work, metaphors should be taken literally. According to George Lakoff and Mark Johnson, however, this technique of comparison allows metaphors to simultaneously highlight and hide certain attributes and/or qualities about the thing(s) being compared to (12-13). The highlighting and hiding of metaphors gives readers more insight into what Shakespeare may have meant at the time or even more so in what context did the people of the Elizabethan Age use language (Palfrey 11). Two important components of metaphors that do the highlighting and hiding are the vehicle and the tenor; each can be implicit or explicit as well. The metaphor in question emphasizes both the importance and unimportance of Lavinia’s character.

While the two plays share the same characters and provokes similar ideal dichotomies of master and slave; colonizer and colonized; natural and supernatural (Chan 2008: 1), there are differences, for instance, Caliban becomes a Black slave and the ending is changed in Césaire’s version. Based on these alterations, some consider A Tempest not a translation of The Tempest but rather an adaptation that stands on its own, independent of the original. In response to this view, this paper attempts to examine the relationship between the two versions and analyze in what ways A Tempest can and cannot be regarded a translation of The Tempest. The reason to view Césaire’s work not as a translation of Shakespeare’s but as an adaptation only will first be presented. How the

In a genre that contradicts a novelist's affluence of narrative explication, the language in its purest form becomes Shakespeare's powerful instrument, wherein he controls it with the unusual combination of force, subtlety, and exactitude”