Formality vs Informality (and all that lies between).

Milky   Sat Feb 18, 2006 7:13 am GMT
Do you agree with this statement?

"A formal style is characterized by detachment, accuracy, rigidity and heaviness; an informal style is more flexible, direct, implicit, and involved, but less informative."

From:


Formality of Language: definition, measurement and behavioral determinants

FRANCIS HEYLIGHEN & JEAN-MARC DEWAELE

...

And later in the same paper:

It is proposed that formality becomes larger when the distance in space, time or background between the interlocutors increases, and when the speaker is male, introverted or academically educated.
Uriel   Sat Feb 18, 2006 7:22 am GMT
I don't know that informality is less informative.
M56   Sat Feb 18, 2006 11:52 pm GMT
<I don't know that informality is less informative. >

"He's coming to the party."

"Steven Jones is coming to the party of Isabel Davis."
Uriel   Sun Feb 19, 2006 8:10 pm GMT
I don't think "he's coming to the party" is necessarily an example of informality.
Philx   Sun Feb 19, 2006 9:23 pm GMT
I always tought that informality consisted in less rigid syntax and grammar. Not being less informative
M56   Thu Feb 23, 2006 7:25 am GMT
<I don't think "he's coming to the party" is necessarily an example of informality.>

Of course it is. It contain a "weak" form (he's), a pronoun that refers to someone known only to the speaker and listener/s, and a reference to some party known only to the same.
M56   Thu Feb 23, 2006 7:27 am GMT
<I always tought that informality consisted in less rigid syntax and grammar. Not being less informative >

It also consists of more implicit use of language. Formal language is more explicit.
Travis   Thu Feb 23, 2006 8:10 am GMT
>>I always tought that informality consisted in less rigid syntax and grammar. Not being less informative<<

Not necessarily that either; not following literary forms as strongly does not make less rigid syntax and grammar. One must remember that following *different* grammatical rules does not mean that something has *less rigid* grammatical rules. In this case, at least with the English dialect here, I find that formal speech often allows far more variation in word order than informal speech, which tends to follow a far more strict word order with respect to placement of adverbs, prepositions, predicate adjectives, and like than formal speech. Furthermore, in informal speech here, any variations from basic subject-verb-indirect object-direct object word order outside of normal wh-pronoun, relative pronoun, and auxiliary/modal movement are almost completely forbidden, unlike more poetic formal speech where such can be broken at times.