The Iconicity of Peirce in Shakespeare’s Plays(A case study of King Richard II, A Midsummer Night’s Dream and

Romeo and Juliet)

Fathu RahmanHasanuddin University, Indonesiafathurahman.ag17@yahoo.co.id

AbstractThis study examines the iconicity of Peirce in Shakespeare's plays by utilizing the intersection theory of Equivalence of Roman Jakobson and Theme-Rheme of Halliday. For the purposes of analysis, this study took three works purposively of each of Shakespeare plays; King Richard II (History), A Midsummer Night's Dream (Comedy) and Romeo and Juliet (Tragedy). The purpose of this paper to reveal the form of iconicity that Shakespeare used in his workkey words: iconicity, poetics function, theme-rheme, equivalence

1. IntroductionIconicity has often been defined in contrast to arbitrariness, and the

opposition of the iconic vs the arbitrary sign has frequently been associated with the dichotomy of the natural vs the conventional sign; the icon is the natural sign, which is similar to its object of reference, while the arbitrary sign is the conventional sign, which evinces no similarity to its referencial object. (Noth, 2000: 18).

The word icon is then to be a part of iconicity in a broad sense. Peirce is the first and the only one who introduced icon in the field of semiotics. In Pierce’s semiotics, the icon is a sign (iconic sign) that is based on the similarity between the sign (representamen) and its object, although not solely rely on the natural image as it is, since the graph, schema, or map also include icons. As a philosopher, Pierce looked at that type of sign which is based on resemblance is iconic signs, and its phenomena can be referred to as iconicity

Iconic signs, according to the classical definitions of Peirce and Morris (Noth, 1990: 121), have a sign vehicle which is similar to their denotatatum, but the validity of this criterion is similarity has frequently been questioned, icons not only are signs of visual communication, but exist in almost any area of the semiotic field including language.

Furthermore, Haley (1988: 14) claims that [..] an icon signifies its object because it resembles it in some ways, as a photograph is (principally) an icon of the things depicted in the picture. To support this statement, Sandarupa [quoting Peirce 1955] (2012: 10) argues that [..] when a sign related to an object based on the idea of similarity, it is called icon. If it is on existential, contiguity or causal relation then it is index. If it is on convention then it is symbol. Peirce gave various definition of the icon which focus on different criteria valid for a large class of semiotis phenomena [..]. One of his main criteria is

1

based on his semiotic category of firstness. Another is the criterion of similarity between the sign vehicle and its object. From his triadic system of semiotics, Pierce divided a triple subclassification of the icon. (Noth, 1990:

2. Language and Poetic FunctionIn relation to language and poetic function, language must be

investigated in all the variety of its functions. The playwright as addresser sends a message to addressee. In order to be operative the message, it requires a context referred to (the "referent" in another, somewhat ambiguous, nomenclature), graspable by the addressee, and either verbal or capable of being verbalized; a code fully, or at least partially, common to the addresser and addressee (or in other words, to the encoder and decoder of the message); and, finally, a contact, a physical channel and psychological connection between the addresser and the addressee, and enabling them to participate in communication actively.

Jakobson (1960: 351) is one of the noted linguists who earlier talked about Linguistics and Poetics by dealing primarily with the question, "What makes a verbal message a work of art?" He had argued that the main subject of poetics is the differentia specifica of verbal art in relation to other arts and in relation to other kinds of verbal behavior, therefore, poetics is entitled to the leading place in literary studies.

Poetics deals with problems of verbal structure, just as the analysis of painting is concerned with pictorial structure. Since linguistics is the global science of verbal structure, poetics may be regarded as an integral part of linguistics. Arguments against such a claim must be throughly discussed. It is evident that many devices studied by poetics are not confined to verbal art.

Linguistics is likely to explore all possible problems of relations between discourse and the "universe of discourse": what of this universe is verbalized by a given discourse and how it is verbalized. The truth values, however, as far as they are - to say with the logicians - "extralinguistic entities" obviously exceed the bounds of poetics and of linguistics in general.

Language functions as proposed by Jakobson (1960) includes a wide range of utility functions based on character of usefulness. The six functions of language are as follows;

1) The Referential Function2) The Expressive (alternatively called "emotive" or "affective")

Function 3) The Conative Function4) The Poetic Function5) The Phatic Function6) The Metalingual (alternatively called "metalinguistic" or "reflexive")

Function.One of the six functions is always the dominant function in a text and

usually related to the type of text. In poetry, the dominant function is the poetic function: the focus is on the message itself. The true hallmark of poetry is according to Jakobson "the projection of the principle of equivalence from the axis of selection to the axis of combination". Very

2

broadly speaking, it implies that poetry successfully combines and integrates form and function, that poetry turns the poetry of grammar into the grammar of poetry, so to speak. A famous example of this principle is the political slogan "I like Ike." (Jakobson, 1960)

It is then the so-called emotive or "expressive" function, focusing on the addresser, aims at a direct expression lies toward what the playwright is expressing about. It tends to produce an impression of a certain emotion, whether true or feigned. In fact, the purely emotive stratum in language is presented by the interjections. They differ from the means of referential language both by their sound pattern (peculiar sound sequences or even sounds elsewhere unusual) and by their syntactic role (they are not components but equivalents of sentences) and so on.

The traditional model of language was confined to these three functions - emotive, conative, and referential - and the three apexes of this model - the first person of the addresser, the second person of the addressee, and the "third person" properly (someone or something spoken of). Certain additional verbal functions can be easily inferred from this triadic model. Thus the magic, incantatory function is chiefly some kind of conversion of an absent or inanimate "third person" into an addressee of a conative message.

According to Jakobson (ibid, 1960: 358) whenever the addresser and/or the addressee need to check up whether they use the same code, speech is focused on the code: it performs a metalingual (i.e., glossing) function. "I don't follow you — what do you mean?" asks the addressee, or in Shakespearean diction, "What is't thou say'st?" And the addresser in anticipation of such recapturing question inquires: "Do you know what I mean?" Imagine such an exasperating dialogue: "The sophomore was plucked " "But what is plucked?" "Plucked means the same as flunked." "And flunked?" "To be flunked is to fail an exam."

The researcher observes, however, three further constitutive factors of verbal communication and three corresponding functions of language. There are messages primarily serving to establish, to prolong, or to discontinue communication, to check whether the channel works ("Hello, do you hear me?"), to attract the attention of the interlocutor or to confirm his continued attention ("Are you listening?" or in Shakespearean diction, "Lend me your ears!" - and on the other end of the wire "Um-hum!").

The linguistic study of the poetic function must overstep the limits of poetry, and, on the other hand, the linguistic scrutiny of poetry cannot limit itself to the poetic function. The particularities of diverse poetic genres imply a differently ranked participation of the other verbal functions along with the dominant poetic function. Through this method the reseracher applies in the drama text by text reduction process (the Theme-Rheme), in other words, this method was transferred into a drama text analysis

The very basic question, what is the empirical linguistic criterion of the poetic function? In particular, what is the indispensable feature inherent in any piece of poetry? To answer this question we must recall the two basic modes of arrangement used in verbal behavior, they are i) selection and ii) combination. The selection and combination can be related to what Halliday

3

calls Theme-Rheme. The Theme-Rheme application, once again, is one way to find thematic structure of the work.

Let’s see again the example as proposed by Jakobson (1960: 358) if "child" is the topic of the message, the speaker selects one among the extant, more or less similar nouns like child, kid, youngster, tot, all of them equivalent in a certain respect, and then, to comment on this topic, he may select one of the semantically cognate verbs - sleeps, dozes, nods, naps. Both chosen words combine in the speech chain.

The working principle of poetic function comes through the selection process and reduction. The selection is produced on the basis of equivalence, similarity and dissimilarity, synonymy and antonymy, while the combination, the build-up of the sequence, is based on contiguity. The process can be seen in the following figure;

Figure 1. The Selection Process of Poetic Fuction

What the writer exposures in figure 1 above refers to the process of poetic function as proposed by Jakobson in Closing Statement: Linguistics and Poetics, as follows;

The poetic function projects the principle of equivalence from the axis of selection into the axis of combination. Equivalence is promoted to the constitutive device of the sequence (1960: 358)

To sum up, the analysis of verse is entirely within the competence of poetics, and the latter may be defined as that part of linguistics which treats the poetic function in its relationship to the other functions of language. Poetics in the wider sense of the word deals with the poetic function not only in poetry, where this function is superimposed upon the other functions of language, but also outside poetry, when some other function is superimposed upon the poetic function.

Parallelism is of two kinds necessarily - where the opposition is clearly marked, and where it is transitional rather or chromatic. Only the first kind, that of marked parallelism, is concerned with the structure of verse. Now the force of this recurrence is to beget a recurrence or parallelism answering to it in the words or thought and, speaking roughly and rather for the tendency than the invariable result, the more marked parallelism in structure whether of elaboration or of emphasis begets more marked parallelism in the words and sense To the marked or abrupt kind of parallelism belong metaphor, simile, parable, and so on, where the effect is

4

sought in likeness of things, and antithesis, contrast, and so on, where it is sought in unlikeness.

Let’s take an argument of what Jakobson (1960: 375) had already explained about the extract of Julius Caesar’s Shakespeare. The main dramatic force of Antony's exordium to the funeral oration for Caesar is achieved by Shakespeare's playing on grammatical categories and constructions. Mark Antony lampoons Brutus' speech by changing the alleged reasons for Caesar's assassination into plain linguistic fictions. Brutus' accusation of Caesar, "as he was ambitious, I slew him" undergoes successive transformations. First Antony reduces it to a mere quotation which puts the responsibility for the statement on the speaker quoted: "The noble Brutus // Hath told you." When repeated, this reference to Brutus is put into opposition to Antony's own assertions by an adversative "but" and farther degraded by a concessive "yet." The reference to the alleger's honor ceases to justify the allegation when repeated with a substitution of the merely copulative "and" instead of the previous causal "for" and when finally put into question through the malicious insertion of a modal "sure":

1) The noble BrutusHath told you Caesar was ambitious;For Brutus is an honourable man,But Brutus says he was ambitious,And Brutus is an honourable man.Yet Brutus says he was ambitious,And Brutus is an honourable man.Yet Brutus says he was ambitious,And, sure, he is an honourable man.

79808488899596

100101

(JC/III.2 79-101)

The following polyptoton — "I speak . . . Brutus spoke . . . I am to speak" (Jakobson 1960: 357) — presents the repeated allegation as mere reported speech instead of reported facts. But it is strongly iconic. The effect lies, modal logic would say, in the oblique context of the arguments adduced, which makes them into unprovable belief sentences:

2) I speak not to disprove what Brutus spoke,But here I am to speak what I do know.

(JC/III.2 79-102-103)

This is a metapragmatic. The metapragmatic signalling allows participants to construe what is going on in an interaction, in this case, Antony and Brutus.

The most effective device of Antony's irony is the modus obliquus of Brutus' abstracts that is changed into a modus rectus to disclose that these reified attributes are nothing but linguistic fictions. To Brutus' saying "he was ambitious", Antony first replies by transferring the adjective from the agent to the action ("Did this in Caesar seem ambitious?"), then by eliciting the abstract noun "ambition" and converting it into the subject of a concrete passive construction "Ambition should be made of sterner stuff" and subsequently to the predicate noun of an interrogative sentence, "Was this ambition?" — Brutus' appeal "hear me for my cause" is answered by the

5

same noun in recto, the hypostatized subject of an interrogative, active construction: "What cause withholds you?" While Brutus calls "awake your senses, that you may the better judge." the abstract substantive derived from "judge" becomes an apostrophized agent in Antony's report: "O judgment, thou art fled to brutish beasts." Incidentally, this apostrophe with its murderous paronomasia Brutus-brutish is reminiscent of Caesar's parting exclamation "Et tu, Brute!" Properties and activities are exhibited in recto, whereas their carriers appear either in obliquo ("withholds you," "to brutish beasts," "back to me") or as subjects of negative actions ("men have lost." "I must pause"):

3) You all did love him once, not without cause;What cause withholds you then to mourn for him?O judgment, thou art fled to brutish beasts,And men have lost their reason!

(JC/III.2.104-107)

The last two lines of Antony's exordium display the ostensible independence of these grammatical metonymies. The sterotyped "I mourn for so-and-so" and the figurative but still stereotyped "so-and-so is in the coffin and my heart is with him" or "goes out to him" give place in Antony's speech to a daringly realized metonymy; the trope becomes a part of poetic reality:

4) My heart is in the coffin there with Caesar,And I must pause till it come back to me.

(JC/III.2.108-109)

Based on the description above, it is shown clearly how an argument can be a form of poetic reality

3. Theme and Rheme of Shakespeare’s WorksOne way to find thematic structure of the works is to map them into

the Theme and Rheme application. The application is about the organization of message of the work. The message may belong to the content of poem or other literary works like drama, novel, shortstory etc. The Theme, term proposed by Halliday (1990: 38), is the element which serves as the poin of the departure of the message; it is that with which the clause is concerned (1990: 38).

In this discussion, Theme-Rheme is driven to obtain the essence of the dominant ideas in the works. The idea that dominates the content of the work obtained through the reduction process (removing the elements that are accidentals) in stages to arrive on two topics; The main topics and supporting topics. Topics occupation can be used as a comparison in binary. The second component of this, it would seem interrelationships through iconicity theory developed by Peirce

In linguistics, the topic, or theme, of a sentence is what is being talked about, and the comment (rheme or focus) is what is being said about the topic. That the information structure of a clause is divided in this way is generally agreed on, but the boundary between topic/theme depends on grammatical theory. The difference between "topic" and grammatical subject is that topic is used to describe the information structure, or pragmatic

6

structure of a clause and how it coheres with other clauses, whereas the subject is a purely grammatical category. For example it is possible to have clauses where the subject is not the topic, such as in passive voice.

The Theme is one element in a particular structural configuration which, taken as a whole, organizes the clause as a message. A message itself consists of a Theme combined with a Rheme (Halliday, 1990: 39). In other words, Rheme is simply as a clause. So the structure of message is a combination of Theme and Rheme.

In practical purpose, Theme is the starting point for the message; it is what the clause is going to be about, it can be identified as that element which comes in the first position in the clause of English language (ibid, 1990: 39). In order to get a clear obstruction (between three, subject, and actor), the following example, from Halliday, of the Theme and Rheme as follows;

Table 1. Theme and Rheme of Hallidaythe dukemy auntthat teapot

has given my aunt that teapothas given that teapot by the dukethe duke has given to my aunt

Theme Rheme

By using the table above, of course, it is a textual meaning. In addition, some points, at least, can be explained, among others are mark and unmark themes. Mark theme - when something is ‘marked’, it means that there is unusual thing and should be noticed because of the way it stands out. When it is marked, we look for the purpose behind the speaker’s patterning: it may be to draw the addressees’ attention to a particular group of words or phrase, while unmark theme is a state of affair is the most expected, common, and unmarked case.

Concerning about the meaning according to Halliday's theory, there are three things related to the problem of meaning (function) ie ‘experientian meaning’, ‘Interpersonal meaning’, and ‘textual ‘meaning’. Those three points (Butt, 2001: 46, 86, 134) can be explained as follows; .

1) Experiential function/meaning: The function of the language is to talk about what is going on (process), i.e. to encode our experience of the world, it conveys a picture a reality (language as experience). In this function, there are three general categories of human experience, they are; participants, process, and circumstances.

2) Interpersonal function/meaning: The function of the language is to interact with each other, i.e. to encode our interaction, and to show how defensible we find our propositions (finite/auxiliary/modals).

3) Textual function/meaning: The function of the language is to organize our experiential and interpersonal meanings into a linear and coherent whole, so the production is not random or in the other word, to organize our messages. It is cover the theme-rheme of the message.

What is related to table 8 above, it is merely function number 3, since It is to cover the theme-rheme of the message. But other functons can be explored

7

respectively on table 9, 11, and 15 of the respectively of the topicalization of the samples.

By applying this method, Theme + Rheme, the essence of the work can be found. In other words, each work can be expressed in a brief statement as a representation of the overall work

It is to clarify that the text coherence is characterized for having a defined structure and correlation among its sentences and ideas. This is a very important point. Established patterns such as Theme and Rheme and thematic choices are used to give a coherent sense to the text. But these resources are not the only ones, (it may from act to act and scene to scene), cohesive ties are other elements which combined with structural ones "give sense", in other words, they give texture to the text. In the drama text for instance, is not taken ramdomly but rather based on logical consideration and argumentation-based. At the result, it may produce an integrated texture of text. The texture then is considered what makes a text a real text instead of a group of sentences with no relation among them. In addition, the proses of decontextulisation of text it might be a flashback as the condition and the plot of drama.

The construction analysis model of Thema - Rhema through the poetics punction theory presents three works of which represent each category of Shakespeare’s works. King Richard II is for History, A Midsummer’s Night Dream is for Comedy, and Romeo & Juliet represents for Tragedy.

King Richard II: HistoryKing Richard II represents the work of history in the discussion. This work tells the story of the life of a young king who was crowned at the age of 10 years. Richard II, written around 1595, is the first play in Shakespeare's second "history tetralogy," a series of four plays that chronicles the rise of the house of Lancaster to the British throne. (Its sequel plays are Henry IV, Parts 1 & 2, and Henry V.) Richard II, set around the year 1398, traces the fall from power of the last king of the house of Plantagenet, Richard II, and his replacement by the first Lancaster king, Henry IV (Henry Bolingbroke).

Richard II, who ascended to the throne as a young man, is a regal and stately figure, but he is wasteful in his spending habits, unwise in his choice of counselors, and detached from his country and its common people. He spends too much of his time pursuing the latest Italian fashions, spending money on his close friends, and raising taxes to fund his pet wars in Ireland and elsewhere. When he begins to "rent out" parcels of English land to certain wealthy noblemen in order to raise funds for one of his wars, and seizes the lands and money of a recently deceased and much respected uncle to help fill his coffers, both the commoners and the king's noblemen decide that Richard has gone too far. This work was heavily influenced by Kingdom of England history.

Based on the plot of this drama, the topic of the message is ‘work ethic of the king’. The cognat verb is ‘work ethic of the king’, several extrants, more or less similar noun such as royal power → good governance → consistency → fair → firm. In addition, this Shakespeare's work is based on the idea of Divine Right of Kings,

8

The central theme of the drama is whether the subjects of a king have a right to overthrow and replace him. It is seen from the image of King Richard II as weak, unwise, or unduly harsh. These three things are to be found in the three extract quotations as follows;

5) That power that made you kingHath power to keep you king in spite of all. The means that heaven yields must be embraced And not neglected. (KR/III.2. 27-30)

Richard himself enunciates the view that his authority comes from God himself; thus, he has a “divine right” to rule. John of Gaunt and the Duke of York support this view even though Richard exhibits qualities unbecoming a king. Henry Bolingbroke, on the other hand, believes the people have the right to depose the king if he does not act in the best interests of the realm

6) I live with bread like you, feel want,Taste grief, need friends. Subjected thus,How can you say to me I am a king? (KR/III.2. 175-177)

The conflict between King Richard and Bolingbroke where both are very ambitious for power. Henry Bolingbroke, on the other hand, believes the people have the right to depose the king if he does not act in the best interests of the realm. Many nobles, as seen, support this view and help Bolingbroke unseat Richard. However, after Sir Pierce Exton and his henchmen kill Richard, Bolingbroke feels deep remorse.

7) Thus play I in one person many people,And none contented: sometimes am I king;Then treasons make me wish myself a beggar,And so I am.

(KR/V.5. 31-34)King Richard sometimes seems to be acting the role of king, more concerned with the nobility of his appearance than with the reality and responsibilities of kingship. Many characters in the play use ceremonies or theatricality as a mask to conceal their true nature and intentions

Based on the three extract quotations above, it seems clear that there are aspects of iconicity that are related to one another. Aspects of iconicity are depicted as shown below;

8) That power that made you king Hath power to keep you king in spite of all. I live with bread like you, feel want, Taste grief, need friends. Subjected thus, How can you say to me I am a king? Thus play I in one person many people, And none contented: sometimes am I king; Then treasons make me wish myself a beggar, And so I am.

2728

175176

17731

323334

9

The iconic force of topic of the message exists in the centrum “I am a king (?)” question intonation is a strong force in this context. Similarly the repetition (power and king), it can be a kind of iconic force in a certain case. Theme-Rheme "that power that made you king treason then make me wish myself a beggar" was revealed on the feud between Richard and Bolingbroke.

In order to explore more about the topicalization, the researcher proposes the topic of the message by tracing its experiential meaning, interpersonal meaning, and textual meaning. Those three functions are presented in one fusion table as follows;

Table 2. Maximalization of Topic of the Message (King Richard II)

Based on the table above, ‘that power’ is the centrum of the message of the clause ‘that power that made you king then treason make me wish myself a beggar’. In the construction of topic of the message, in the layer of experiential meaning, ‘that power’ is the actor of the process of material of the clause. Then, in the layer of interpersonal meaning, ‘that power’ becomes the subject of the clause. And then, in the layer of textual meaning, ‘that power’ also becomes the topical theme of the clause, where it is unmarked topical theme because it is most expected as a theme.

What Shakespeare wanted to tell in this plays, as a topic message, is ‘power’. Demonstrative ‘that’ in ‘that power’ might be interpreted as a strong iconic force. Once again, the Theme dan Rheme of the topic of the message can be seen in the following figure:

Table 3. Theme – Rheme: Topic of the Message (King Richard II)That power that made you king then treason

make me wish myself a beggarTheme Rheme

So far, the construction of topic of the message is [that] Power: King. The equivalence of it is Treason and Beggar. Their iconic relationship are seen as follows;

10

Figure 2. Iconic Relation of Logical Subject: King Richard II

The iconic relation can be expressed as follows;a = Power → kingb = Treason → beggarc = Power → tresonsd = King → beggare = Power: king → Treason: beggar

‘Power: king’ is equivalence with ‘treason beggar’. The idea of Shakespeare is to express that ‘a king has a power’. Throughout history, a power whatever it is, be always a struggle. In King Richard II, Henry Bolingbroke was trying to seize power from Richard, because he was judged unable to run the government well. On the other hand, the action will take power for Shakespeare expressed as 'treason' and 'beggar'.

A Midsummer’s Night Dream: ComedyA Midsummer Night's Dream is one of Shakespeare's comedy that

tells the story of four couples intoxicated lover who loves in different motives, motives differences are what make this work distinctive. The impression of comedy keenly felt, especially in act 2 scene 2 where the settings are in one place in Athens forest. This work was heavily influenced by Greek myth.

Based on the plot of this drama, the topic of the message is ‘loves in different motives’. The cognat verb is ‘love’, several extrant, more or less similar noun such as loyalty → mutual trust → willing scarifice → keep promise → consistency. → commitment. These four forms of love for each of these pairs is true love, affectation, power and endless love.

The four couples intoxicated lovers are Lysander with Hermia, Demetrius with Helena, Theseus with Hipholita and Oberon with Titania.

A Mid-Summer Night Dreams tells the story of lovers from Athens, Hermia and Lysander that are forbidden to marry. Demetrius seeks to pursue Hermia, and Helena infatuated with Demetrius. Even the king and queen of the fairies is also a fight. Then the king of the fairies use magic potion (juice flowers) that make Demetrius and Lysander fall in love with Helena. This makes Lysander proclaiming a proposition about love, ‘The course of true love never did run smooth (MN.I/1.35). This theme can be analyzed in the plot (MN.V.1. 4-9) as follows:

9) Lovers and madmen have such seething brains, Such shaping fantasies, that apprehend. The lunatic, the lover, and the poet

4579

11

One sees more devils than vast hell can hold; Thesus said to Hypolita that love can make a person crazy, lovers paralyzing common sense, and make the lovers in a state of fear and wavering. Finally the lovers always imagined and as they are not aware of the normal human. Theseus (MN.V.1. 11-18) says:

10) That is the madmen: the lover, all as frantic The poet’s eye, in a fine frenzy rolling And, as imagination bodies forth The forms of things unknown, the poet’s pen

11121718

As the time went, the various challenges faced is four lovers, Lysander and Hermia, and Helena Demetrus, Thesus and Hypolita, Oberon and Titania through the various challenges that they finally found happiness after enduring the challenge and passed with their togetherness. It can be seen from Theseus’s statements in the following

11) That, if it would but apprehend some joyHow easy is a bush suppos’d a bear? But all the story of the night told over, And all their minds transfigur’d so together Here come the lovers, full of joy and mirth

1922232428

A Mid Summer Night’s Dream is one of Shakespeare’s comedies that used jus flower as a way to promote conflict.

Where did this theme come in mind? Hermia and Lysander’s conversation in act 1 scene 1 is a search of key essence of what Shakespeare wanted to convey in this drama. What Lysander says;

12) Ah me! for aught that ever I could read Could ever hear by tale or history,The course of true love never did run smoothBut either it was different blood (MD/I.1.133-136)

From the beginning, we have known two characters who are actually in love each other; Lysander and Hermia. They seem unable to be together since Hermia's father wants her to marry Demetrius instead. In order for Hermia and Lysander to be together, they have to run away, the fairies mess with them, and Lysander is made to fall in love with her for a bit. Helena loves Demetrius, but Demetrius is rude and obnoxious to her. By the end of the story, after many trials. Demetrius and Helena are together, but is it because Demetrius has truly come to lover her, or is he under the fairy spell? Theseus and Hippolyta meet in battle while trying to kill each other. Pretty drastic and unsmooth circumstances, but eventually they have fallen in love and are happily together.

The topic massage of this drama is “the course of true love never did run smooth.” Based on this statement, the Theme is true love while the Rheme is ‘never did run smooth’. This topic of message is reflected iconically in the four couples of lovers.

12

It is now to check out the topic of the message of ‘A Midsummer Night’s Dream’. The presentation of topic of the message (theme, grammatical subject, and logical actor) of ‘A Midsummer Night’s Dream’ is formulated as follow;

Table 4. Maximalization of Topic of the Message(A Midsummer Night’s Dream)

By examining the table above, ‘true love’ is the centrum of the

message of the clause ‘true love never did run smooth’. In analizing the topic of the message. In the layer of experiential meaning, ‘true love’ becomes the actor of the process of material of the clause. Then, in the layer of interpersonal meaning, ‘true love’ is the subject of the clause. And once again, in the layer of textual meaning, ‘true love’ is also the theme of the clause, where it is unmarked topical theme because it is most expected as a theme.

Concernng with the discussion, Theme-rheme must be in consideraton to find the centrum of the message. From that point is then to relate the analisis of the equivalence of Roman Jakobson. Through those two points the discussion will be terminated in iconicity.

As already stated in table 11 above, Theme-rheme of this play is “the course of true love never did run smooth” (MN/I.1.135) as stated by Lysander might be seen as a topic message. Find its Theme-Rheme in the following table.

Table 5. Theme – Rheme: Topic of the Message (A Midsummer Night’s Dream)

True love never did run smoothTheme Rheme

Topic of the message is Love: Smooth. The quivalence of it is Apprehend: Together. Their iconic relationships are seen in the following;

13

Figure 3. Iconic Relation of Logical Subject:A Midsummer Night’s Dream

The iconic relation can be expressed as follows:a = Love → smoothb = Apprehend → togetherc = Love → apprehendd = Smooth → togethere = Love: smooth → Apprehend: together

The function of “never” in this statement is to clarify the relation between “true love” and “did run smooth”. Without the word “never”, the message of drama “A Mid Summer Night’s Dream” can be different.

Romeo and Juliet: TragedyRomeo and Juliet is one of a very popular tragedies written by

Shakespeare early in his career. It is about two young star-crossed lovers whose deaths ultimately reconcile their feuding families. It was among Shakespeare's most popular plays during his lifetime. It is one of his most frequently performed plays. Today, the title characters are regarded as archetypal popular young lovers.

Romeo & Juliet is a true love story that will be remembered for all the time. This work has become an icon of Shakespeare. The central theme of the plot may be traced as follows;

13) Romeo, there dead, was husband to that Juliet; And she, there dead, that Romeo’s faithful wife:I married them; and their stolen marriage day . . . . . . . .A sleeping potion; which so took effect As I intended, for it wrought on her The form of death. Meantime, I writ to Romeo

231232233

244245246

(RJ/V.3.231-246)

Friar said that Romeo and Juliet is a couple that blessed for marriage. Romeo died as the husband of Juliet, and Juliet as the wife of Romeo. Friar gave Juliet a sleeping potion for a couple of days, the effects of the ‘sleeping potion’ made Juliet's body became stiff and pale as a corpse. Friar then wrote a letter to Romeo about Juliet’s death scenario. Balthasas said:

14) I brought my master news of Juliet’s death; 272

14

.........And theaten’d me with dead going in the vault; 276 (RJ/V.3.272-276)

When Friar brought news about Juliet having problems on the way, so he asked for a help to Balthasar. In fact, Balthasar, as a result of the hearing trouble, mishears to convey the information to Romeo about Juliet's death scenario. What happens then, Capulet (p.187) stated

15) As rich shall Romeo by his lady lie; Poor sacrifices of our enmity

303304

(RJ/V.3.303-304)

Since the death of Romeo leads to the death of Juliet, Capulet will cease hostility with Montague which had caused much bloodshed. The sad story is told by the Prince as follows;

16) For never was a story of more woeThan this of Juliet and her Romeo.

309310

(RJ/V.3.309-310)

This is the sad story of Romeo and Juliet, a true romance which they capture by taking poison.

Romeo & Juliet is a work that represents the works of Shakespeare tragedies. In this work 'Romeo' can be the topic of the message. In this work it is found several extants, more or less similar nouns such as loyalty → commitment → firmly in the establishment → mutual trust → fulfill promises → keep to the principle → not betray → shock-resistant → willing to sacrifice → as lively as dead → drink the poison

The cognate verb is ‘fidelity’ (faitful). Message construction can be expressed as follows;

17) Romeo, there dead, was husband to that Juliet; And she, there dead, that Romeo’s faithful wife:I married them; and their stolen marriage day A sleeping potion; which so took effect The form of death. Meantime, I writ to Romeo I brought my master news of Juliet’s death; And theaten’d me with dead going in the vault; Their course of love, the tidings of her deathAs rich shall Romeo by his lady lie; Poor sacrifices of our enmity For never was a story of more woeThan this of Juliet and her Romeo. (RJ/V.3.231-310)

231232233244

246272276

287303

304309310

Based on the topicalization, the iconic forces of the message exists in the centrum ../ Romeo, there dead, was husband to that Juliet; // And she, there dead, that Romeo’s faithful wife/.. In addition, this centrum is then to find as the topic of the message, where the poetics structure belongs to the equivalence in iconicity. Look at the following points

15

18) Romeo, there dead, was husband to that Juliet;And she, there dead, that Romeo’s faithful wi fe

231232

(RJ/V.3.231-232)

Here Shakespeare uses the specific style in the form of clauses ‘husband to that Juliet’ → Romeo, and Romeo’s faithful wife → Juliet, ‘there dead’ iconis, and Romeo to be opposite to ‘she’ [in this case, Juliet]. To confirm that Romeo & Juliet is a tragic story, Shakespeare expressed in two lines like below

19) For never was a story of more woe Than this of Juliet and her Romeo

309310

(RJ/V.3.309-310)

Based on the plot where the actor suffered a sadness, woe and sacrifice are initiated by Juliet.

Furthermore, Theme dan Rheme of the topic of the message can be seen in the following figure:

Table 6. Theme – Rheme: Topic of the Message (Romeo & Juliet)Romeo is a husband who died with a

faitful wifeTheme Rheme

The topic of the message is ‘Romeo is a husband who died with a faitful wife’. The Theme of Romeo & Juliet is ‘Romeo’. It is shown in the table 11 above. As for the experiencial meaning, the logical actor (carrier) is also ‘Romeo’, so with the interpersonal meaning, the grammatical subject is ‘Romeo’ as well. In short, the Theme, grammatcal subject, and logical actor are all ‘Romeo’.

The argument can be explained that the significance of these three functional concepts is that each one correspondences to a different mode of meaning of a clause. As a working approximation, Halliday (1990: 36-37) defines each of them as follows;

i. The Theme is a function in the ‘clause as a message’. It is what the message is concerned with: the point of departure for what the speaker is going to say

ii. The Subject is a function in the ‘clause as an exchange’. It is the element that is held responsible: in which s vested he sccess of the clause in whatever is its particular speech function.

iii. The Actor is a function in the ‘clause as a representation’ (of a process). It is the active participant in the process: the one that does the deed.

These three headings – clause as message, clause as exchange, clause as representation – refer to the three principal kinds of meaning that embodied in the structure of a clause. Each of these kinds of meaning is expressed by means of certain configuration of functions. Thus Theme, Subject and Actor do not occur as isolates; each is associated with one or more other functions of the same kind, together with which it forms meaningful

16

configurations. A meaningful configuration of funcions of the same kind is what is meant by structure (see table 12).

Furthermore, from the plot of Romeo & Juliet, it is found that some of the relationships of the main characters that are iconic to each other between Romeo and Juliet (reciprocal), are shown in the figure below

Figure 4. Reciprocal Iconic Relation between Romeo and Juliet

In Romeo & Juliet, it is found two logical subjects; Romeo and Juliet. Both logical subjects are the main characters of the play. As for the construction of the topic of the message, it can be stated with Romeo: Love: Death (die). This equivalence with Juliet: Sacrifice: Woe.

Based on the iconic relation of logical subject (figure 22), Romeo & Juliet has two logical objects. But it’s strucrue of text, the existence of Romeo cannot be separated with Juliet and they are complimentary each other.

However, 'love' and 'sacrifice' is represented by the word 'love', then 'death' and 'woe' is represented by the word 'death' or 'die'. Iconic relationship can be described as follows;

Figure 5. Iconic Relation of Logical Subjects: Romeo & Juliet

The iconic relation can be expressed as follows;a = Romeo → love

17

b = Juliet → sacrificec = Rome love → deathd = Juliet sacrifice → woee = Romeo → Julietf = love → sacrificeg = death → woeh = death → Julieti = love → Julietj = Romeo → sacrificek = Romeo → woel = Romeo: love: death → Juliet: sacrifice: woe

The following is the poetic structure of Romeo & Juliet based on figure 5 and 6 above. Once again, the reciprocal iconicity described (to be maximalized) as follows;

Figure 7. Representation of Predication

As mentioned in the previous, ‘love’ and ‘sacrifice’ is represented by the word ‘love’, while ‘death’ and ‘woe’ is represented by the word ‘death’ or ‘die’. Here is needed to adjust the part of speech since its predicative is a verb.

There is a reason why the representation of predication to be united into one because of the elements that are inherent in a manner other elements. In other words, if one element already mentioned, it is otomatically the other elements included in it.

Furtermore, recalls to the actor (logical subject) of the play, it has been found three layer of equivalences are organised as follows;

Table 7. Degree of Equivalence of Romeo & Juliet3 Romeo : Love = Juliet : Love2 Romeo : Die = Juliet : Die1 Romeo : Juliet = Husband : Wife

The degree of equivalence is formulated based on the message construction (data corpus 162) as presented before.

Based on the topicalization the degree of equivalence of Romeo & Juliet will show equivalence in iconicity of each degree of equivalence. The iconic relations of each are presented in the following

18

Figure 8. Equivalence in Iconicity (1)

The iconic relation can be expressed as follows;a = Romeo → Love : Attributionb = Juliet → Love : Attributionc = Romeo → Juliet : Appositiond = Romeo [Love] → Juliet [Love] : Equivalence in iconicity

Figure 9. Equivalence in Iconicity (2)

The iconic relation can be expressed as follows;a = Romeo → Die : Attributionb = Juliet → Die : Attributionc = Romeo → Juliet : Appositiond = Romeo [Die] → Juliet [Die] : Equivalence in iconicity

Figure 10. Equivalence in Iconicity (3)

The iconic relation can be expressed as follows;a. = Romeo → Juliet : Appositionb. = Husband → Wife : Appositionc. = Romeo → Husband : Synonimy (iconicity)d. = Juliet → wife : Synonimy (iconicity)e. = Romeo/Juliet → Husband/wife: Equivalence in iconicity (double-

iconicity).

What is presented to the three figures above are the maximalization to find the topic of the message as proposed by Jacobson, and Theme Rheme as

19

proposed by Halliday. The presentation of the topic of the message (Theme, grammatical subject, and logical actor) is formulated as follows;

Table 8. Maximalization of Topic of the Message(Romeo & Juliet)

Based on the table above, ‘a husband who died’ is the centrum of the message of the clause ‘Romeo is a husband who died with a faitful wife’. In the construction of topic of the message. in the layer of experiental meaning, ‘Romeo’ becomes the actor (carrier) of the process of relational attributive of this clause. Then, in the layer of interpersonal meaning, ‘Romeo’ is the subject of the clause. And the last about the layer of textual meaning, ‘Romeo’ also becomes the Theme of the clause. In this layer, ‘Romeo’ is unmarked topical theme, since it has expected as a theme of the clause.

4. Concluding RemarksBased on finding and discussion of this study, it can be proved that

the language used by Shakespeare in his works give aesthetic and rhetoric through his style and iconicity application, and in turn had been a great and a significant contibution for the development of semiotics and stylistics

The conclusions of this study can be stated descriptively as follows; (1) the characteristic of the iconic forces of rhetorical figures in Shakespeare's plays divided into internal iconicity and external iconicity, metaphor, for example, are in both of these aspects, (2) iconicity is critical in defining literature, forms and types of what are in literature, to the understanding something in the works should be more increasingly comprehend, and (3) what is theorized by Peirce's icon has now been growing rapidly in various aspects of literary and cultural studies, and has penetrated into the drama text study, as this study. Here the text of the drama should be seen as a performance on the stage.

It should be promoted that the analysis by combining three things; the poetic function, Theme-Rheme and equivalence of the topic of the message are breakthrough in the analysis of literary texts. Decontextualization in literary texts with linguistic discussion has met the

20

scientific criteria that literary texts can be analyzed by using a linguistic approach. Not only the stylistics aspects alone, but more than that, in research on iconic aspects of forces, the literary text should be seen as something dynamic.

Bibliography

21

Abrams, M. H. 1981. The Mirror and The Lamp. London: Oxford University Press., London.

Anderson E. 1998. A Grammar and Iconism. Madison N.J: Feirleigh Dickinsons University Press.

Barthes, Rolland. 1971. Style and It’s Image, in Chatman Seymour, ed., Literary Style, pp. 3-15 London: Oxford University Press.

Barthes, Rolland. 1981. "Theory of the Text" in Unitying the Text: A Poststructuralist Reader. (Robert Young, Ed.). Boston, London and Henley: Routledge & Kegan Paul

Butt, David. (Eds) 2001. Using Functional Grammar. Australia: National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research – Macquarie University.

Clarke, Richard. 2005. Roman Jakobson - Linguistics and Poetics. LITS3304 /Notes 05A, published on (http:// www. rlwcclarke. net/courses/ LITS3304/ 2004-2005/ 05A Jakobson Linguistics AndPoetics.pdf) retrived on 12 August, 2014

Coulthard, Malcolm. 1999. An Inroduction to Discourse Analysis. Newyork: Longman

Cummings, Michael & Simmons, Robert. 1986. The Language of Literarture – A Stylistic Introduction to the Study of Literature. Frankfurt: Pergamon Press.

Eco, Umberto. 1976. A Theory of Semiotics. United States of America: Indiana University Press

------------------. 1992. “Interpretation and Overinterpretation”. Stefan Collini (Ed.). New York Port Chester Cambridge University Press.

Fenk, August, 1997. Representation and Iconicity. Semiotica 115: 215-234.

Fischer, Olga and Nanny Max (eds). 2000. The Motivated Sign. Philadelphia: John Menjamins Publishing Company.

---------. 2008. The Complete Works of William Shakespeare. Scotland: Geddes & Grosset

Haiman, John. 1980. The Iconicity of Grammar: Isomorphism and Motivation. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

---------------, ed. 1985. Iconicity in Syntax. Proceeding of a Symposium on Iconicity in Syntax. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Halliday, M.A.K. and Ruqaiya Hasan. 1989. Language, Context, and Text; Aspects of Language in a Social Semiotic Perspective. Australia: Deakin University Press.

Halliday, M. A. K. 1990. An Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Edward Arnold.

------------------------. 2004. An Introduction to Functional Grammar (Third Edition) New York: Oxford University Press.

22

Haley, Michael Cabot. 1988. The Semeiosis of Poetic Metaphor. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Hiraga, Masako K. 1994. Diagrams and Metaphors: Iconic Aspects in Language. Japan: (Journal of Pragmatics 22 [1994] 5-2) Faculty of Liberal Arts – Chiba City Japan

Innis, Robert E. (ed) 1985. Semiotics : An Introductory Anthology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

Jakobson, Roman. 1960. Closing Statemnt: Linguistics and Poetics. In Sebek, Thomas A., ed., Style in Language, pp 350-77. Cambridge, Massisipi: MIT Press.

Kramsch, Claire. 1998. Language and Culture. Toronto (series editor by H.G. Widdowson): Oxford University Press.

Leech, G.N and M.H. Short. 1984. Style in Fiction: A Linguistic Introduction to English Factual Prose, London: Longman.

Levin, Harry. 1973. "Literature as an Institution" in “Sociology of Literature and Drama”. (Burns & Burns, Eds.). Harmondsworth: Penguin Books Ltd.

Lyne, Raphael. 2011. Shakespeare, Rhetoric and Reconition. Mexico City: CamridgevUniversity Press.

Max, Nanny and Fischer, Olga (eds). 1999. Form Miming Meaning (Iconicity in Language and Literature). Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publishing Co.

Murphy, Sean. 2007. A Corpus Stylistic Approach to Shakespearian Soliloquies. Lancaster: Lancaster University Postgraduate Conference.

Muller, Wolfgang G. 2000. “Iconicity and Rhetoric”, in Fischer, Olga and Nany Max (eds). 2000. The Motivated Sign. Philadelphia: John Menjamins Publishing Company.

Noth, Winfried. 1990. Handbook of Semiotics. Bloomington and Indiana: Indiana University Press.

------------------- 2000. “Semiotic Foundation of Iconicity in Language and Literature”, in Fischer, Olga and Nany Max (eds). 2000. The Motivated Sign. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Perng, Ching-Hsi. 2008. Who’s the Addressee? Four Types of Shakesperean Soliloquy. Chang Gung Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 1:2 (October 2008), 203-222.

Ricoeur, Paul. 1977. The Rule of Metaphor. (English Edition) Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Short, M.H. 1981. Discourse Analysis and the Analysis of Drama. An offprint from Applied Linguistics, Vol. II, Number 2, Summer 1981. Oxford Clarendon Press.

23

Sonesson, Goran. 2009. From mimicry to mime by way of mimesis: Reflections on a general theory of iconicity. Sweden: Department of semiotics/Centre for cognitive semiotics, SOL, Lund University

Tilak, Raghukul.1985. Background to English Literature (A Study in Literary Forms). New Delhi: Rama Brothers

Verdonk, Peter. 2002. Stylistics. Oxford. Oxford University Press.

Widdowson, H.G. 1988. Stylistics and the Teaching of Literature. London: Longman.

24