【正文】 listed. The parallelism of “inferior to none in pleasant conceits” and “superior to all in honest conditions” gives a schematic balance to the image of something light (“pleasant conceits”) being weighed against something heavy (“honest conditions”), underlining the faulty logic of Eupheus’s youthful mind. So the schematism of form aims at the ideas being presented. A style is a way of writing….In general, [style] applied to human action that is partly invariant and partly variable….Now this picture leads to few plications if the action is playing the piano or playing tennis…But the relevant division between fixed and variable ponents in literature is by no means so obvious. What is content, and what is form, or style? The attack on a dichotomy of form and content has been persistent in modern criticism。 To put the problem more concretely, the idea of style implies that the words on page might have been different, or differently arranged, without a corresponding difference in substance. (“Generative Grammars and the Concept of Literary Style”, 1964)When dinner was over, the senator made a speech.The senator made a postprandial oration. and the grammatical, rather than lexical, aspect of style is the one on which Ohmann concentrates. Thus in the analysis of a writer’s style in a work of fiction, we should study what the writer has written against the background of what he /she might have written。The above notion of style as “dress of thought” or as manner of expression” consists in the assumption that there is some basic sense that can be preserved in different renderings of words or sentence structures. This is not likely to be challenged in everyday uses of language. But in literature, particularly in poetry, paraphrasing bees problematic. For example, the metaphor in “Come, seeling night, / Scarf the tender eye of pitiful day” (Macbeth, III. ii. 4647) denies us a paraphrase in either a literal sense or a hidden meaning. Any paraphrase would devoid it of its richness of implications that induces us to find interpretations beyond the meanings captured by paraphrasing. Such a metaphor, as Terence Hawkes says, “is not fanciful embroidery of the facts. It is a way of experiencing the facts.” (Metaphor, 1972) Literary devices, in addition to metaphor, such as irony, ambiguity, pun, and even images, poetry. With deliberate consideration of this fact, some theorists, especially the New Critics, reject the formmeaning dichotomy and they tend to see sense and style as one thing, as Wimsatt asserts:It is to be noted that the emphasis upon the artistic integrity and inviolability of their works is echoed not only in poets but also in many prose writers, and we can find an articulation in Tolstoy’s words: “This is indeed one of the significant facts about a true work of art—that its content in its entirety can be expressed only by itself.” Critics holding such as idea about style tend to look at a work of fiction as a verbal artifact. They believe that in such a verbal artifact there can be no separation of the author’s creation of the plot, character, social and moral life, from the language in which they are portrayed. As David Lodge puts it: “The novelist’s medium is language: whatever he does, qua novelist, he does in and through language, Lodge is ready to see no difference between the kind of choice a writer makes in calling a character “darkhaired” or “fair,” since all the choices a writer makes are a matter of language. Lodge also argues that there is no essential difference between poetry and prose and that the following tenets apply to both: Perhaps Lodge’s statements sound rather arbitrary since we do have a great number of translated literary works in various languages, including poems, in which the essential artistry remains (though something must have been lost), and paraphrasing sometimes can be said to be one of important methods for a basic understanding and appreciation of the essential literariness of a literary work and is often employed in the teaching of literature. Whatever notion a person may have towards style, it is important to understand that language in fiction is the focus in our analysis of style. At the same time language is used to project a world beyond language itself, and our analysis of language can never exclude our general knowledge and understanding of the real world.ForegroundingAs the foregrounding of language in a story is concerned, it may be useful to make a checklist of features which may be significant in a given text, though the features which remend themselves to the attention in one text will not necessarily be important in another text by the same or different author. Leech and Short (Style in Fiction, 1981) list four headings of stylistic categories, which may be helpful in our analysis of the style of a story:General: Is the vocabulary simple or plex? Formal or colloquial? Descriptive or evaluative? General or specific? How far does the author make use of the emotive or other associations of words ,as opposed to their referential meanings? Does the text contain idiomatic usages, and if so, with what kind of register (language variation beyond dialectical differences, such as differences between polite and familiar language。 scientific, religious, legal language, etc.) are these idioms associated? Is there any use of rare or specialized vocabulary? Are any particular morphological categories noteworthy (eg rare pound words, words with particular suffixes)?Adjectives: To what degree of frequency are the adjectives used? To what kinds of attributes do the adjectives refer (eg physical, psychological, visual, auditory, color, referential, emotive, evaluative, etc)? Are the adjectives restrictive or nonrestrictive? Attributive or predicative? for example “I name the ship the Queen Elizabeth.”), psychological states or activities, perceptions, etc? Are they transitive, intransitive, linking, etc? Are they stative (descr