Masaryk University in Brno

Faculty of Arts
Department of English and American Studies

The Film Dialogue in Bukowski's Barfly

(Sociolinguistic Analysis)

JAN SVOBODA, Jr.

Supervisor: doc. PhDr. Ludmila Urbanová, CSc.

Brno 2004
Declaration:

I declare that I have worked on this diploma thesis

independently, using only the primary a n d
secondary sources listed in the bibliography.

•Jat^ py^é^^e
Acknowledgements:

I would like to t h a n k doc. PhDr. Ludmila Urbanová,

CSc. for her critical comments, valuable pieces of
advice and kind help during the supervision of my
diploma thesis.
 CONTENTS

GLOSSARY OF TERMS 1

INTRODUCTION 4

CHAPTER ONE 10
Speech Behaviour in Social Context

CHAPTER TWO 21
Screenplay Versus Soundtrack
2.1. Notes on Phonetic Features 23
2.1.1. Voice Intensity Indicative of Emotion
2.1.2. Intonation and Emphasis
2.1.3. Elusion
2.1.4. Repetition

2.2. Morphosyntactic Level 28

2.3. Lexical Choices 31

CHAPTER THREE 34
Film Discourse, Pragmatic Meaning, Style
3.1. Situation 37
3.2. Participants 42
3.3. Ends 43
3.4. Act Sequences, Key and Instruments 45
3.5. Preconclusion 61

CHAPTER FOUR 63
Conclusion

APPENDIX 70
 GLOSSARY OF TERMS
ellipsis (elide, ellipt-ed, -ical) A term used in GRAMMATICAL analysis to
refer to a SENTENCE where, for reasons of economy, emphasis or style, a
part of the STRUCTURE h a s been omitted, which is recoverable from a
scrutiny of the CONTEXT. TRADITIONAL grammars talk here of an
ELEMENT being 'understood', b u t LINGUISTIC analyses tend to constrain
the notion more, emphasising the need for the 'elided' (or 'ellipted') parts of
the sentence to be unambiguously specifiable. For example, in the sentence
A: Where are you going? B: To town, the 'full' FORM of B's sentence is
predictable from A's sentence ('I a m going to town'). But in s u c h sentences
as Thanks, Yes, etc., it is generally unclear what the full form of s u c h
sentences might be (e.g. T h a n k s is due to you'? 'O give you thanks'?), and in
such circumstances the term 'ellipsis' would probably not be used.
'Elliptical' constructions are a n essential feature of everyday conversation,
b u t the rules governing their occurrence have received relatively little study.
They are also sometimes referred to as REDUCED, CONTRACTED or
'abbreviated' constructions.
[Crystal 1985. 107-108]

exclamation (exclamatory) A term used in the classification of SENTENCE

FUNCTIONS, a n d defined sometimes on GRAMMATICAL and sometimes on
SEMANTIC or SOCIOLINGUISTIC grounds. Traditionally, a n exclamation
referred to any emotional UTTERANCE, usually lacking the grammatical
structure of a full SENTENCE, and marked by strong INTONATION, e.g.
Gosh!, Good grieß In some grammars, 'exclamatory sentences' have a more
restricted definition, referring to constructions which begin with what or
how without a following INVERSION of SUBJECT and VERB, e.g. What a fool
he was!, How nice! Semantically, the function is primarily the expression of
the speaker's feeling - a function which may also be expressed using other
grammatical m e a n s , e.g. What on earth is he doing? (when it is obvious what
is being done) The term is usually contrasted with three other major
sentence functions: STATEMENT, QUESTION and COMMAND.
[Crystal 1985. 113-114]

command A term used in the classification of SENTENCE FUNCTIONS, and

defined sometimes on GRAMMATICAL and sometimes on SEMANTIC or
SOCIOLINGUISTIC grounds. SYNTACTICALLY, a command is a sentence
which typically h a s no SUBJECT, and where the VERB is in the
IMPERATIVE MOOD, e.g. Come here! Semantically it is primarily used to tell
someone to do (or not do) something. From A SPEECH ACT point of view, the
function of c o m m a n d may be expressed using other forms, e.g. that boy will
stand up, or by a dominant INTONATION. The term is usually contrasted
with three other major sentence functions: STATEMENT, QUESTION,

1
EXCLAMATION. In grammatical discussion, c o m m a n d s are usually referred
to as 'imperative' in form.
[Crystal 1985. 55]

question A term used in the classification of SENTENCE FUNCTIONS, and

defined sometimes on GRAMMATICAL and sometimes on SEMANTIC or
SOCIOLINGUISTIC grounds. SYNTACTICALLY, in English, a question is a
SENTENCE with INVERSION of the SUBJECT and first VERB in the verb
PHRASE (yes-no questions', s u c h as Is he coming?), commencing with a
question word (WH-questions, s u c h as Where is he?) or ending with a
question TAG (e.g. He's coming, isn't he?) Some would include the u s e of
sentences with a rising INTONATION to be a class of question. Semantically,
question express a desire for more information, usually requesting a reply,
from the listener (exception include 'rhetorical questions' (e.g. isn't that
awful?)). The term is usually contrasted with three other major sentence
functions: STATEMENT, COMMAND and EXCLAMATION. In grammatical
discussion, questions are usually referred to as INTERROGATIVE in form.
[Crystal 1985. 254]

statement A term used in the classification of SENTENCE FUNCTIONS, and

defined sometimes on GRAMMATICAL and sometimes on SEMANTIC or
SOCIOLINGUISTIC grounds. SYNTACTICALLY, a statement is a sentence
which contains a SUBJECT occurring before VERB, e.g. The man is coming.
Semantically, it is used primarily to convey information. The term is usually
contrasted with three other major sentence functions: QUESTION,
COMMAND, EXCLAMATION. In grammatical discussion, statements are
usually referred to as DECLARATIVE or INDICATIVE in form.
[Crystal 1985. 286]

continuity editing: The key concepts of continuity editing, as described by

Bordwell & Thompson, can be listed like this:

1. Establishing shot (the room or other space of action is defined, including

the position of characters).

2. Shot/reverse-shot (cutting back and forth, e.g., depicting dialogue).

3. Eye-line match (cut from one shot to another, motivated by direction of

the character's gaze in the first shot). 4. Match on action (cut motivated by
direction and continuity of action between two shots). 5. Match on sound
(off-screen sound causes characters to t u r n in the direction of the sound,
and a cut is made to a shot showing the source of the sound). 6. Analytical
editing (this very method of choosing parts of w h a t is shown within the
established space of action and putting them together in the kind of puzzle
described). Finally, we may list as a 7th element the possible cycle of
establishing, breaking down, and re-establishing (the established scene is

2
broken down in parts, which are edited together as described, and as
another person enters, the characters are redistributed/re-established in the
room, whereupon a new breakdown with a n editing series may begin).

[See Bordwell 1986.211-220]

3
 Waking From Drunkenness on a Spring Day

"LIFE in the World is but a big dream;

I will not spoil it by any labour or care."
So saying, I was drunk all the day,
Lying helpless at the porch in front of my door.
When I woke up, I blinked at the garden-lawn;
A lonely bird was singing amid the flowers.
I asked myself, had the day been Wet or fine?
The Spring wind was telling the mango-bird.
Moved by its song I soon began to sigh,
And as wine was there I filled my own cup.
Wildly singing I waited for the moon to rise;
When my song was over, all my senses had gone.

-LiPo

INTRODUCTION

The reasons I have chosen to write a final thesis about the film
dialogue in Barfly are multiple. I studied film in the Department of Film
Studies in the Faculty of Arts at Masaryk University in Brno and I have been
primarily engaged with the relationship between word and film image during
my studies. My chief interest in the Department of English and American
Studies h a s been linguistics. Most importantly; I have been concerned with
the field of sociolinguistics. In the presented thesis I a m going to m a k e an
attempt of bringing together the studies of English language and film studies.
The reason I have chosen the original screenplay of Barßy written by Charles
Bukowski is a result of conjuncture of themes. I belong to the generation of
young people in Czech Republic which was highly influenced by the books of
the author since the early 1990s. Since that time Bukowski and his books
have become a great popular phenomenon. The fact that the academic
community keeps overlooking this phenomenon is part of my motivation for
writing about Bukowski's film screenplay. The writer is believed, among
other things, to write extremely authentic a n d simple dialogues. When I
started to think about the topic in linguistic terms, I became aware of the
incongruities in language used in the screenplay in comparison with the
soundtrack version of the film dialogue.

4
 The film itself is a rare example of an American movie celebrating
"experience of unreformed alcoholics" 1 and is believed to be entropie in
comparison with t h e classic representation of alcoholism dominating t h e
history of American film. 2 Barbet Schroeder is the director and producer of
Barßy. He invited Bukowski to write the screenplay and worked on
production for three years. During the time, the first version of the script
underwent m a n y changes. However, even the original screenplay of the
movie published in 1987, after the film's release, does not precisely present
the actual language used in the film soundtrack. My hypothesis lies exactly
in the assumption t h a t the language used in the film soundtrack is changed
and stylized for the film narration purposes. The film discourse of the
dialogue is supposed to be reflected in the film soundtrack version more
t h a n in the screenplay. To demonstrate the hypothesis, I have chosen two
short dialogues between one dyad of characters t h a t appear in the beginning
of Barfly. The discourse analysis based on the comparison of the two
versions of the dialogues will be undertaken.
For a better illustration of the plot and the film's critical reception, a
review of Barfly written by a respected American film reviewer Roger Ebert is
included.

THE FILM'S PLOT AND REVIEW

By Roger Ebert

The movie takes place in a gutbucket bar down on the bad

side of town, where the same regulars take up the same positions
on the same bar stools every day. Your private life is nobody's
business, but everybody in the joint knows all about it. To this bar,
day after day, comes Henry (Mickey Rourke), a drunk who is
sometimes also a poet. The day bartender hates him, probably for
the same reason all bartenders in gutter saloons hate their
customers: It's bad enough that they have to serve these losers,
without taking a lot of lip from them, too.

1
The citation taken from Alexander Hicks' review of a book called Hollywood Shot by Shot Alcoholism in American
Cinema written by Norman K. Denzin in 1991.
According to Denzig the classic representation of an alcoholic in American cinema shows the character's grace,
fall and redemption, [see Hicks 1992.1789]

5
Henry and the bartender head for the back alley to have a fight.
Henry is beaten to a pulp. Hawking up spit and blood, he tosses
down another drink and heads off for the hovel he calls his room.
Another day, another adventure. One day he looks up from his
drink and sees, sitting at the other end of the bar, a woman
named Wanda (Faye Dunaway). She looks like she belongs in the
place and she doesn't look like she belongs in the place, you know?
She looks like a drunk, all right, but she's still kind of classy.
Henry and Wanda strike up a conversation and, seeing that Henry
is flat broke, Wanda invites him home.

The dialogue scenes between Rourke and Dunaway in this

movie are never less than a pleasure, but their exchanges on that
first night are poetry. She explains that if a guy comes along with
a fifth, she is likely to leave with that guy, since when she drinks
she always makes bad decisions. He nods. What other kinds of
decisions are there when you're drunk? They drink, they talk, they
flirt, they coexist. Another day, another adventure.

One day a beautiful rich girl with long hair (Alice Krige)
comes to the bar looking for Henry. She publishes a literary
magazine and has purchased some of Henry's stuff. He likes this
development. They go to her house and drink, talk, flirt and
coexist. The next time she turns up in the bar, Wanda is already
there. The rich girl and Wanda do not coexist.

That's basically what the movie is about. "Barfly" is not

heavy on plot, which is correct, since in the disordered world of
the drinker, one thing rarely leads to another through any visible
pattern. Each day is a window that opens briefly after the
hangover and before the blackout, and you can never tell what
you'll see through that window.

"Barfly" was directed by Barbet Schroeder, who

commissioned the original screenplay by Bukowski and then
spent eight years trying to get it made. (At one point, he
threatened to cut off his fingers if Cannon Group president
Menahem Golan did not finance it; the outcome of the story can
be deduced by the fact that this is a Cannon release.) Rourke and
Dunaway take their characters as opportunities to stretch as
actors, to take changes and do extreme things. Schroeder never
tries to impose too much artificial order on the events; indeed, he
committed to filming Bukowski's screenplay exactly as written, in
all its rambling but romantic detail.

The result is a truly original American movie, a film like no

other, a period of time spent in the company of the kinds of
characters Saroyan and O'Neill would have understood, the kinds
of people we try not to see, and yet might enjoy more than some of
our more visible friends. "Barfly" is one of the year's best films.

6
 Henry Mickey Rourke
W a n d a Wilcox Faye Dunaway
Tully Alice Krige
Detective J a c k Nance
Jim J . C . Quinn
Eddie Frank Stallone
Grandma Moses Gloria LeRoy

Cannon presents a film directed by Barbet Schroeder, and

produced by Schroeder, Fred Roos and Tom Luddy.
Screenplay by Charles Bukowski.
Photographed by Robby Müller.
Edited by Eva Gardos.
Running time: 100 minutes.
Classified R. At McClurg Court. +

Louis Armstrong was trying to explain jazz one day, and he

finally gave up and said, "There are some folks that, if they don't
know, you can't tell 'em." The world of Charles Bukowski could be
addressed in the same way. Bukowski is the poet of Skid Row, the
Los Angeles drifter who spent his life until age 50 in an endless
round of saloons and women, all of them cheap, expensive, bad or
good in various degrees. "Barfly," based on his original screenplay,
is a grimy comedy about what it might be like to spend a couple of
days in his skin - a couple of the better and funnier days,
although they aren't exactly a lark.
[Ebert 1987]

Chicago Sun-Times

In this thesis, I will study the complexity of the film dialogue in Barfly.
For example, I a m going to concentrate on how the forms of address are
employed in the movie's diegesis, which is the entire created world of the
narrative. What is revealed by the way characters of the movie address each
other? How does the dialogue function in the specific narrative of Barfly?
These questions will be answered with regard to linguistic and non-linguistic
m e a n s of communication.
The opening words uttered in the story of the film are:

A man's voice shouting off-screen: "Come on Eddie, hit him again!"

A female's voice shouting off-screen: "I love you! I love your mean
guts, Eddie, kill him!"

7
 These short outcries introduce information about the speech
behaviour in the movie. The u s e s of the first name Eddie and the personal
p r o n o u n you indicate intimacy. The n o u n phrase, mean guts is the first
example of slang used in the movie. Colloquial speech is frequently a part of
verbal exchanges in communities of speakers who know each other very well.
However, the film viewer is unaware of what exactly happening in the film
until the moment when the camera reveals a scene in which several people
watch two young men engaged in a physical combat. A shouting m a n and
woman are cheering on Eddie the bartender who is fighting Henry, t h e main
character of the movie. At this point the first direct verbal exchange is heard.

Eddie: All ya gotta do is beg for little mercy.

Henry: Quitting to you would be like swallowing piss for eternity.
Eddie: Come on, give it up! (Now instead of later!)
Henry: You're gonna need a priest, you prick. And while your
mother's crying at the funeral I'm gonna goose her with a turkey
neck!

Utterances remain short. What is at work here is an affect-laden verbal

display. Eddie's use of the colloquial variants ya and gotta for you have to
shows a high degree of informality and closeness. He is advising Henry to
give u p and t h u s showing his superiority. Henry's reply is a direct insult to
Eddie, as is emphasized by the vulgar word piss. Henry addresses Eddie
with the personal pronoun, you, and with the derogatory noun, prick. Their
language is informal, colloquial and also elliptical. For instance, the
utterance, Now instead of later! (appears only in the screenplay) is a clear
example of ellipsis, referring to the preceding DIRECTIVE in the form of an
indirect address Come on, give it up!
The language game of power and dominance is exposed here.
Characters reveal their attitudes from their specific points of view. This is
done in an outrageous way, because extremely vulgar language is being used.
The affective meaning of the utterances is t h u s foregrounded. To u n d e r s t a n d
the game, the context of the speech situation h a s to be taken into
consideration.

8
 The context of the speech situation consists of several layers. In
Linguistic Criticism, Fowler distinguishes between the context of utterance,
context of reference a n d the context of culture. He writes:

there is the immediate context of utterance, the situation within

which discourse is conducted. This comprises: the physical
surrounding or 'setting'; the distribution of the participants vis-a-
vis one another, whether they are two people talking face-to-face,
one person addressing a large audience, two people speaking on
telephone, a group of informal conversationalists scattered
through a large room, or whatever; the channel employed, whether
aural, visual or electronic, etc., which will determine the 'mode' as
some variety of speech or of writing.
[Fowler 1996. 112]

In this case, the first lines of the film dialogue are considered. One
m u s t bear in mind t h a t apart from the communication in process in a
specific speech situation on the screen, there is also the communication
between the film a n d the spectator, which is also specific. In other words,
the verbal interaction takes place on the screen, i.e. in the world of fiction, or,
more exactly, in a n American narrative film made in Hollywood in 1987.
Thus, the particular cinematic representation of this reality h a s to be taken
into account in u n d e r s t a n d i n g the ways the film dialogue interacts with
audience. Also, the verbal exchange is situated in an alley behind a b a r t h a t
is predominantly visited by m e m b e r s of the lower class. The b a r is a specific
social setting, and this setting h a s to be considered in the analysis as well.

9
 CHAPTER ONE
Speech Behaviour in Social Context

First of all, a thorough analysis of the social dimension of the film

dialogue h a s to be undertaken. One dyad of characters will be in focus:
Henry v. Eddie a n d also situations when Henry talks to himself in a form of
voice-over monologue. In the monologues, Henry is talking to Henry, and
these sequences also offer a certain form of a "dialogue" because of the fact
that they are m e a n t to interact with the spectator's perceptions. A close
examination of the developments in the relationship reflected in the
characters' verbal exchanges will lead to a better understanding of t h e
participants' speech behaviour in the social context. For the purpose of
gaining insight into social context of the verbal exchanges, four dimensions
of analysis are employed:

1. The solidarity scale concerned with participant relationships

(distant, intimate)
2. The status scale concerned with participant relationships
(subordinate, superior)
3 . The formality scale relating to the setting or type of interaction
(informal, formal)
4. Two Junctional scales relating to the purposes or topic of interaction
(i) The referential function scale (high, low)
(ii) The affective function scale (high, low)
[See Holmes 2000.12]

The scales introduced by Holmes will provide a n analytical tool for

describing and understanding the piece of the film dialogue in its social
context. Recurrences and typical patterns in making utterance will be
revealed. The meaning of a word is arbitrary and is always constructed in

10
the process of interaction. Every utterance h a s its own unique context; in
order to decode the meaning of the utterance the context m u s t be observed
and interpreted.

Henry the Barfly and Eddie the Barkeeper

In Barfly, there are three scenes in which Henry Chinaski (played by

Mickey Rourke) speaks to the night bartender called Eddie (Frank Stallone). I
will concentrate here the first two of these scenes.

1.1. Henry v. Eddie in SCENE ONE

In the opening scene of the film we see a n d hear an extreme exchange

of opinions, during a fistfight in front of the rear entrance of a bar called
"The Golden Horn." A multiplicity of voices is heard from behind the bar
when the camera p a n s to the rear entrance. A louder voice screams off-
screen:
(Eddie): All you gotta do is beg for a little mercy.
The next shot shows Henry's bloodied face answering the outrageous
suggestion which, only now understood, h a s been pronounced by Eddie, as
he s t a n d s a n d moves his fists in front of Henry. The aggressive dialogue
continues, accompanied by fist blows and spitting:
Henry: Quitting to you would be like swallowing piss for eternity.
Eddie (off-screen): Come on, give it up!
Henry: You're going to need the priest, you, prick. And while your mother's crying at
the funeral I'm gonna goose her with a turkey neck! Hey, baby.
Henry: Oh, shit...oh, hey, that the best you can do? You better phone for help.
Eddie: Scumbag! Faggot!
Eddie: I hate that cheap punk. Fuck he thinks he's going from?
Eddie: That's the third time. You'd think that son of a bitch would've learnt by now
and stopped trying me.

11
 This short verbal interaction accompanies the fistfight t h a t Henry
finally loses. Eddie finishes the dialogue while kicking Henry as he lies on
the ground. Other people have to hold Eddie back from massacring Henry.
When speaking, Eddie's (Frank Stallone's) voice s o u n d s extremely angry, and
it is followed by the highly-strung facial expression.
This brief description of the context of situation from which it is
understood where the dialogue takes place, I will move to the four social
dimensions reflected in the u s e of language. The degree of intimacy between
the participants is extremely high. Nevertheless, there is a difference in the
frequency with which the personal pronoun you is used. While Eddie
addresses Henry by you only once in this sequence of dialogue (All you gotta
do...), Henry u s e s the pronoun showing closeness and familiarity six times in
the first scene. Once, Henry addresses Eddie with a vulgarism you prick,
which adds to the negativity of Henry's intimate verbal act. The resonance
of the expression is enhanced by the specific delivery the actor h a s chosen to
use. Timing is crucial for the delivery. After the prolonged pronunciation of
the word priest, a short you arrives, introducing a heavy fist blow
synchronized with the shouted vulgarism prick. Before and after you, two
dramatic p a u s e s are employed, t h u s giving weight to the utterance. On the
other hand, Eddie chooses to use either no form of address at all, or
derogatory terms such as faggot and scumbag. Moreover, in the last two
lines, Eddie addresses Henry indirectly calling him that cheap punk and that
son of a bitch. This gives evidence of a high degree of negative intimacy
(showing disrespect) on the social distance scale. At the same time, s u c h
intimate verbal interaction is highly negative because of the meanings of the
expletives used as well as for the context of the situation, which is very
informal.
Nevertheless, the slight incongruity in the frequency of the u s e of you
(higher in Henry's contributions) and the u s e of derogatory forms of address
(higher in Eddie's case) might reveal a slight difference in the degree of
negative intimacy of the two speakers. In other words, it expresses the

12
different attitudes of Eddie and Henry, and at the same time, it s h e d s more
light on their social s t a t u s .
The social s t a t u s of the characters is conveyed by the frequent u s e of
the vernacular, including ungrammatical language varieties or structures.
For this purpose, slang and colloquial expressions are employed in t h e
interaction. In Henry's verbal choice the expressions are swallowing piss, the
already mentioned word prick alliterating with priest and a more complex u s e
of slang I'm gonna goose her with a turkey neck while referring to Eddie's
mother. The n o n - s t a n d a r d grammatical form of Oh shit...oh hey, that the
best you can do? is a type of REDUCED construction (see GLOSSARY OF
TERMS). Henry omits the verb he in his utterance which also reveals further
information about Henry's low social s t a t u s and distance toward the hearer.
Eddie's low s t a t u s is revealed by the use of the expletives, mentioned above,
and the n o n - s t a n d a r d occurrence of grammar, for instance Fuck he thinks
he's going from? is u s e d instead of the standard paradigm Where does he
think he is from? Eddie's creative use of English grammar in this utterance
underlines his final superiority, since Henry is unable to answer while lying
in blood unconscious on the ground. His line becomes a statement of Eddie's
power reflected in linguistic terms.
Generally speaking, it can be argued that both men are using
vernacular forms of language showing their lower social status. Common u s e
of contracted forms like You're gonna or All you gotta instead of you are going
to and All you have to also suggests a low degree of formality and a low
status. This is evident from the context of the situation, e.g. the setting. Men
having a fight in the bar, with audience consisting of similar kinds of bar
inhabitants of a comparably low s t a t u s . However, this is apparent only from
the visual level of the movie.
The style of the utterances provides evidence t h a t the participants are
verbally competing here to show who is able to use more colloquial
expressions in order to exhibit their superiority and power and, possibly, to
boost their low social s t a t u s . Both men deny their subordination to one

13
another. They attempt to degrade a n d insult each other by the u s e of various
forms of the vernacular, which is supposed to "... carry macho connotations
of masculinity a n d toughness" [Holmes 2000.174-175]. This is reflected in a
low degree of formality in the participant's speech t u r n s . Slang, non-
standard language and elliptical (REDUCED) expressions can be observed in
their u s e of language (see the description above). Therefore, the type of
verbal behaviour Eddie a n d Henry u s e seems to functionally employ the
social prestige upside down.
This dyad u s e s utterances as verbal "weapons" in the battle for
dominance t h a t they are having, as each tries to humiliate the other. Henry's
t u r n s are longer a n d more complex, while Eddie u s e s shorter sentences with
frequent vulgar words. The slightly higher complexity of Henry's
contributions signals his better command of the language. This reflects his
superiority for a moment, when he says: Hey, baby... to himself with a smile.
However, soon after this, he is strongly attacked by Eddie's fists a n d kicks,
which "shorten" his last contribution and consequently make him silent.
When considering the referential functional scales, one will take notice of the
fact t h a t Henry's utterances show a prevailing a n d high degree of affective
content t h a n information content. The usage of exclamation Oh, shit...oh,
hey... or the alliteration priest, you prick are supporting the idea t h a t Henry
u s e s language more for its own sake - to be poetical, to express his emotions
and not to give new pieces of information. T h u s the affective meaning and
poetic function of Henry's language are foregrounded. Eddie is also more
affective using frequently obscene, vulgar forms of address. Only in the final
sentence does he reveal information about the p a s t and present. This h a s
been the third time Henry h a s dared to fight Eddie and also the third time
Eddie h a s won. This information provided by Eddie is important for the next
scenes of the movie a n d t h u s serves to anchor diegesis and characters. It
will be instructive for u s to follow the social dimensions reflected in the
dialogue in the second encounter between this dyad.

14
 1.2. Henry v. Eddie in SCENE TWO

The second encounter between Henry and Eddie takes place in T h e

Golden Horn' b a r again. Henry walks into the b a r a day after the preceding
fight, sits behind the bar and addresses Eddie to order a glass of draft beer.
How does he deliver his request? What is the form of the speech act?
Henry t u r n s his head towards Eddie, who is standing at the other side
of the b a r talking to a woman, and says calmly: Hey, boy, fetch me a draft!
The casual tone of the utterance doesn't react to any previous trouble with
Eddie. Henry chooses a considerably familiar tone when addressing his
counterpart by the word boy. This type of form of address is loaded with a
high degree of intimacy and, although the form of this utterance is a direct
command, it is not intended to insult directly, it s o u n d s almost acceptable.
However, the implicit meaning of this strategy suggests t h a t Henry is teasing
Eddie right from the start while approaching him with s u c h "fatherly"
attitude, t h a t is to say, with lower degree of negative intimacy. One simply
doesn't ask a bartender for beer by using words hey, boy..., especially if one
had a n open conflict with him the previous night. The context of the
situation helps to distinguish between the degrees of negative intimacy in
verbal behaviour of the interlocutors 3 . Eddie t u r n s his head b u t ignores him.
After a while Henry chooses to shout a more expressive insult: Hey, you! You
in that filthy apron! This utterance opens u p a series of increasingly offensive
animosity a n d humiliation leading to another fistfight between the
characters. The recurrence of the personal pronoun you, emphasizes the
illocutionary force of the verbal act and makes it more affectionate. Moreover,
this recurrence also refers to the similar style Henry u s e s to address Eddie
in the previous scene. The informality and r u d e n e s s of this speech act is
effective as Eddie stops talking and walks toward Henry in a lazy, self-

3 Degrees of negative intimacy in the verbal interaction are dealt with in the chapter three devoted to the
contextual interpretation of speech behaviour.

15
important fashion while taking on his favourite "macho" language game of
power and dominance:
Eddie: I hear a voice down there but I'm sure I don't see much.
(pause) It seems like that beating I gave you last night must've
rattled your bells, huh?

Eddie's speech t u r n shows signs of his a s s u m e d superiority. Henry is

referred to as a voice, and t h u s h e is even denied the right to be addressed
directly. From the start, Eddie is trying to exhibit his dominance over Henry
by showing how insignificant a n d low his social s t a t u s is. The first sentence
employs witty language which is used to convey insult. Henry is being
ridiculed also by the u s e of the slang expression rattled your bells. This
phrase is followed at the end of Eddie's utterance by the highly informal
question tag, huh? This becomes a rheme of the message and t h u s
reinforces the sarcastic effect of this speech act. However, Henry replies with
an even more profound and complex offensive strategy. Remember ordering a
draft, barkeep. What, you out brew or has lobotomy finally taken hold, huh?
In the first short sentence, Henry reminds Eddie of his social position of a
bartender who is obliged to serve the customer. In other words, Eddie is
reminded of the boundaries of his social s t a t u s relevant to the context of the
situation. The colloquial and old-fashioned variant of the address term
barkeep helps to subvert the p r e s u m p t u o u s superiority of Eddie. The
subversion is expanded on the bitterly sarcastic use of language referring
informally b u t not vulgarly to Eddie's bad mental condition. Eddie's
humiliation is achieved by the u s e of informal and REDUCED language. In
the first sentence, the subject (i) is missing and the predicate are is elided in
the second sentence.
On the social solidarity scale, a slight change can be recognized. It is
apparent t h a t using the address term barkeep, Henry is suddenly being less
intimate. On the contrary, he insists on his distance from Eddie. The degree
of formality remains quite low a n d h a s a tendency to decline in the following
verbal exchanges.

16
 Eddie's reaction to the insult is an even more intense a n d threatening
insult directed to Henry. He leans across the b a r toward Henry saying in a
quiet mood: I'll drive your head right through the fucking wall tonight, you
faggot. I pulled my punches on you last night...But don't move! The first
sentence shows a n example of alliteration of the /f/ phonemes in the two
vulgarisms used to reinforce the offensive impact of the utterance. The
second sentence is a reminder of the preceding event (fistfight) and again
uses alliteration. This time it is the phoneme / p / being applied to reinforce
Eddie's speech. The third sentence commands a n d precedes t h e physical
action narrated by the camera. Eddie sets a glass of beer down in front of
Henry and waits to be paid while smoking a cigarette in a macho style.
Henry slams his h a n d on the b a r as if paying with coins, looking at Eddie.
Then he lifts his palm a n d there is nothing. This act of body language is
accompanied by Henry's soft and short giggle. Once more, he radically
refuses to admit Eddie's rights a s a bartender, a n d moreover, he subverts
social s t a t u s a n d authority. Eddie's reaction to this is evidence of his losing
his temper which is expressed by the different intonation, more aggressive
mood and the s u d d e n change of the facial expression: Fuck you on tonight?
Eddie's anger is verbalized in a condensed form in which the expletive
phrase fuck you on is used as a substitute for a standard form what the fuck
are you on enriching the question by a directly offensive insult. This
sentence is a t r a n s p a r e n t example of the way the informality, offensiveness,
and REDUCTION are complexly interrelated in the film dialogue. The
utterance also signals Eddie's typical use of language, his rhetorical style,
which tends to be structured in shorter, more condensed forms, since he
seems to be unable to control his emotions.
Here is a sample of the s u b s e q u e n t verbal exchanges, those t h a t
escalate to a n open conflict:
Henry (relaxed): Looking at a new man, my boy. I gotta full
tank of fuel.
Eddie (less calmly): You gotta pay for that goddamn beer.
(He is throwing his cigarette into the glass of beer in Henry's hand)

17
 Henry (disappointed but calm): Oh, Eddie, come close, I wanna
tell you something. Come here, I want you hear it good...
Eddie: Yeah, or what?
Henry (softly with pleasure): Your mother's cunt stinks like
(sniffs) carpet cleaner.
Eddie (explodes and shouts): That's it. Fuck!!!
(He throws his towel into Henry's face and with a heavy blow of his
hand he is knocking over the glass of beer, then jumps over the
bar and runs towards the rear entrance. Henry jumps across the
bar too and goes to the beer tap, pouring beer into his mouth and
laughing. Their positions are reversed)
Eddie: Fuck you! Get away from that tap!

Here Henry's social and verbal behaviour reveals its specific pattern.
He keeps violating the Politeness Principle as well as social conventions, in
order to question the social norms of language use. His speech shows a high
degree of intimacy t h a t does not correspond to his social s t a t u s . He is being
extremely informal depending on how fully he needs to insult Eddie to
subvert his position. For this purpose he u s e s sarcasm [lobotomy) a n d
metaphor (carpet cleaner) accompanied by frequent u s e of the p r o n o u n you.
For the purpose of showing his higher status, he also u s e s address forms
hey boy and my boy again. The first n a m e Eddie (the first time in t h e movie)
is used closely before Henry applies the strongest insult so far, w h e n
referring again to Eddie's mother (a recurrence of the word p h r a s e your
mother's) with a n obscene and vulgar slang word cunt Such a verbal act is
successful in triggering off Eddie's aggressive behaviour as he is unable to
verbally counter attack Henry's offensiveness adequately in his s t a t u s of a
bartender. Having temporarily succeeded in humiliating and offending Eddie,
Henry celebrates symbolically by changing position with Eddie. Eddie j u m p s
over the b a r a n d Henry j u m p s behind the bar and drinks beer right from the
tap while laughing and screaming. Henry u s e s metaphorical a n d obscene
verbal behaviour to express his personal attitude towards Eddie a n d his
status.
When the second fistfight starts, the social s t a t u s of Henry a n d Eddie
become more equal again. The direct face-to-face battle gives Eddie a chance
to express his personal attitude towards Henry. The repetition of the negative

18
word unit can't is employed to show the negativity of Eddie's attitude. This
repetition also intensifies the illocutionary force of the speech act. In fact,
Eddie is reacting to Henry's preceding sentence addressed to someone else.
Henry expresses his irresoluteness in: Jim, maybe I can't a n d Eddie takes
advantage of it. Eddie is suddenly the one whose utterances express his
superiority. During the fight Eddie suddenly loses his certainty a little while
saying: What's hold you up, sucker? Usually fall by now. Eddie beats Henry
heavily b u t at one point Henry s t a n d s u p and says: Okay, Eddie. This serves
as a warning for Eddie. Eddie's reply is intensely affective, although h e does
not accept the warning as he questions Henry's "okay" by What's "okay"?,
repetitively. The u s e of f*** derogatory intensifier a n d the address term
referring to Henry's drinking habit in the middle of the questions, is another
example of Eddie's showing off. His presupposed dominance is rooted in
slightly higher social status. He is the person in charge of the bar. His
attitude is closely connected to the context of situation. However, in the back
alley of the bar, where the dustbins are stored, Eddie's position is changed.
Here he represents a big man, with built-up m u s c u l a t u r e who is able to
show his physical, masculine strength to the useless alcoholic who keeps
insulting him a s a m a n .
Eddie: Your life is just a bunch of cant's. You can't work, you
can't fuck, you can't fight.
Eddie: I'd hate to be you if I were me.
Eddie: What's hold you up, sucker? Usually fall by now.
Henry (bleeding heavily): Okay, Eddie...
Eddie (shouting very loudly): What's "okay," youfuckin' rummy?
What's okay?

The referential function of a n utterance appears occasionally in the

interaction between the two "battling", for instance in Henry's turn: Looking
at a new man, my boy. I got a full tank of fuel. New information is given,
however, even here, the degree of affective meaning of the utterance remains
high. The contracted form of you are and I have got, the negatively polite
address in my boy, or the alliteration s o u n d s in full tank of fuel reflect highly
expressive a n d affective speech behaviour.

19
 Eddie approaches Henry as somebody who is below his social s t a t u s .
To express how despicable Henry is, Eddie u s e s specific forms of address,
usually slang like scumbag, faggot, that punk, sucker or youfuckin' rummy.
Henry refuses to take a subordinate position by addressing him with the first
name, insulting his mother with obscene expressions, and using s a r c a s m
and metaphor. At the paralinguistic level, he fights back against Eddie with
gestures and fists, while beating him heavily in the second fistfight.

20
 CHAPTER TWO
Screenplay Versus Soundtrack

TABLE I:
HENRY v. EDDIE, SCENE ONE:
Fistfight

THE ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY SOUNDTRACK

(p.13-15)
1 Eddie: All y a gotta do is beg for a All ya gotta do is beg for a little
little mercy, mercy.
/off- screen/ /off-screen/

2 Henry: Quitting to you would be Quitting t o you would be like

like swallowing piss for eternity. swallowing piss for eternity.

3 Eddie: Come on, give it up! Now Come on, give it up!
instead of later! /off-screen/
/off-screen/

4 Henry: You're going to need the You gonna need the priest, you
priest, prick. And while your prick. And when your mother's
mother's crying at the funeral I'm crying at the funeral I'm gonna
going to goose her with a turkey goose her with a turkey
neck! neck! ...HEY, BABY...

5 Henry: Shit...that the best you can Oh, shit...oh, hey, that the best
do? You better phone for help. y o u can do? You better phone for
help.

6 Eddie: Scumbag! Faggot!

7 Eddie: I really hate that cheap I hate that cheap punk. Fuck he
punk. Where the hell's he coming thinks he's going from?
from?

21
 TABLE II:
HENRY v. EDDIE, SCENE TWO:
Bar talk andfistfight

THE ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY SOUNDTRACK

(P. 37-43)
8 Henry: Hey, boy! Fetch me a draft! Hey boy, fetch m e a draft!!

9 Henry: Hey, you! You in that filthy Hey, you! You in that filthy
apron! apron!
10 Eddie: Seems like all those I hear a voice down there but I'm
Muhamad Alis I've laid on you have sure I don't s e e much. It s e e m s
rattled your bells. like that beating I gave y o u last
night must've rattled your bells,
huh?
11 Henry: Look, barkeep, I remember Remember ordering a draft,
ordering a draft. You out of brew or barkeep. What, y o u out of brew or
h a s your lobotomy finally taken has lobotomy finally taken hold,
hold? huh?

12 Eddie: Eddie: I'll drive you right I'll drive your head right through
through the fucking wall tonight, the fucking wall tonight, y o u
fag. I pulled my p u n c h e s on you faggot. I pulled my punches o n
last night... you last night...
But don't move!
13 Eddie: What the hell are you on Fuck y o u on tonight?
tonight, p u n k ?
14 Henry: You're looking at a new Lookin' at a new man, my boy. I
man, my boy. I've got a full tank of gotta a full tank of fuel.
fuel.
15 Eddie: You pay me for t h a t You gotta pay for that goddamned
goddamned beer! beer, (throws a burning cigarette
into the glass of beer Henry is
holding)
16 Henry: Eddie, come closer. I want Oh, Eddie, c o m e close. I wanna
to tell you something and I want tell y o u something. Come here, I
you hear it good... want you hear it good...

17 Eddie: Yeah? Yeah, or what?

18 Henry: Your mother's c u n t stinks Your mother's cunt stinks like

like carpet cleaner. (sniffs) carpet cleaner.
19 Eddie: That's it, motherfucker! That's it...Fuck!!! (throws a towel
in Henry's face)

22
2 0 Eddie: Fuck you! Get away from Fuck you! Get away from that
that tap tap!
2 1 Eddie: Your whole life is j u s t a Your life is just a bunch of cant's.
b u n c h of cant's. You can't work, You can't work, y o u can't fuck.
you can't fuck. You can't fight. You can't fight.

2 2 Eddie: I'd hate to be you if I were I'd hate t o be y o u if I were m e .

me.
2 3 Eddie: You fight like a girl.
2 4 Eddie: You usually fall by now, What's hold y o u up, sucker?
sucker. What's holding you up? Usually fall by now.
2 5 Henry: Okay, Eddie... Okay, Eddie...

2 6 Eddie: Okay, w h a t ? What's "okay"? What's "okay," y o u fuckin'

You fucking rummy, what's okay? rummy? What's okay?

For a deeper insight into the language use in the interactions in Barfly,
it is necessary to keep an eye on patterns and forms recurring during
conversation. It will be instructive to compare the written form of the
dialogue in the original screenplay with its actual spoken realization in the
movie soundtrack. The incongruity of the written a n d spoken versions will
tell u s more about the n a t u r e of the film dialogue.

2.1. Notes on Phonetic Features

It is impossible for the writer of the screenplay to suggest exactly how a

line should be pronounced. Bukowski describes the way the words should be
uttered in brackets with sparse and vague comments s u c h as gasping,
wheezing it out, quite loudly or softly to Eddie. The volume corresponds to the
degree of emotiveness and the force of the illocutionary act.

2.1.1. Voice Intensity Indicative of E m o t i o n

For instance, the first sentence is uttered by Eddie roaring; the volume
is high. The fistfight context of the utterance reveals a high degree of

23
affective function. It can b e h e a r d t h a t in the first scene it is Eddie whose
words are uttered more loudly. Anger a n d hate toward Henry are
foregrounded by Eddie's stronger and more affective voice. Henry's voice is
not as loud because he feels himself to be "more weary t h a n angry"
[Bukowski 1987.7] as described in the screenplay. The volume of his voice
increases significantly only in the sentence: Hey you! You in that filthy apron!
Henry shouts to draw Eddie's attention because the preceding request for a
draft is ignored. In the second scene, the volume of Eddie's voice is m u c h
weaker. The line beginning í hear... s o u n d s resolute b u t relaxed. Then, when
insulted, Eddie utters the threat in a rather mild voice. He is almost
whispering also because his face is very close to Henry's. However, t h e n his
voice goes u p in the shout Fuck you on tonight? before becoming low and
impatient in You gotta... and then rising extremely again in That's it. Fuck!
and Fuck you! Get away from that tap! By m e a n s of voice intensity Eddie's
uncontrolled emotions are expressed. Even more so, the emotiveness o is
delivered with a scream in the last line of Eddie in the second scene. In the
two dialogues in Barfly, volume of expressions depends on emotiveness and
on the character's nature. It will be perhaps even more revealing to consider
the most prominent items of the characters' short utterances.

2.1.2. Intonation and Emphasis

The intonation nucleus of the Eddie's first line is the word beg. In
Henry's first lines, the one-syllable words piss, prick, the first syllable of
funeral and goose are pronounced as the intonation nuclei of the sentences
and t h u s are given special prominence. In the second scene, Henry chooses
to emphasize t h e following words: draft, you, filthy, draft, lobotomy, man,
fuel, here, good, stinks and the second syllable in okay. On the other hand,
in Scene Two, Eddie chooses to emphasize the most following monosyllabic
words or individual syllables: voice, see, fucking, punches, don't, fuck,
goddamned, what, fuck, fuck, tap, cant's, work, fuck, fight, you, sucker,
fall, what's, a n d what's. This list reveals t h a t the words chosen a s

24
intonation nuclei are predominantly monosyllabic which also corresponds to
the informality of the language.

2.1.3. E l u s i o n
Despite the fact that Bukowski reflects the spoken variety of English,
since he h a d a long and fruitful experience with the spoken word, he could
not prevent some changes in the actual film dialogue. Here and there, the
filmmakers (director, actors, editors, producers) add or omit a few phonemes,
lexemes or even sentences. In line 3, Eddie's utterance h a s been deprived of
the second unit and t h u s made shorter. Another discrepancy between the
screenplay and the soundtrack appears as early as line 4, Henry's second
utterance. Instead of you're going to the phonetic realization you gonna is
heard. The omission of the phoneme standing for the verb be and the use of
the more informal variant of the construction going to reflects the highly
colloquial style of the language used in the interaction. The informality of the
phrases already present in the screenplay is even further intensified in the
movie soundtrack. The soundtrack informal variant gonna is used twice by
Henry instead of going to written in the screenplay. In you gonna the
phoneme / r / is omitted and in I'm gonna the phoneme / m / is realized. In All
y a gotta (line 1), the soundtrack version corresponds to the written form,
meanwhile you gotta pay for is different from the screenplay's you pay me for
in (line 15). However, both express the more informal version of got to or
have to. A phonetically similar unit occurs once more. Nevertheless, this
time it does not express modality b u t possessiveness. It is the moment when
Henry informs Eddie: I got a full tank of fuel It can be heard t h a t the
phoneme / v / standing for the word have h a s been omitted in pronunciation.
There are more frequent elisions in this sequence of the film dialogue.
Sometimes they are recorded already in the screenplay, sometimes not. For
instance in that the best you can do (line 5) after that the phoneme / s / is
missing and this elision is scripted. Similarly, in I wanna tell you something
and I want you hear it good (line 16), the two phonemes / t u / are missing.

25
Once it is contracted into wanna, which is not scripted and once it
disappears altogether after you, exactly as is written by Bukowski. Two
further revealing examples of elisions which are not reflected in the
screenplay are: the phoneme / r / is missing in Henry's come close(r) (line 16)
and the two p h o n e m e s / i n ' / are mispronounced by Eddie in hold(ing) (line
24). It is evident t h a t even though the language in the screenplay reflects the
informality of expression by the two men, on many occasions the actual
spoken dialogue is changed slightly to expand the degree of informality of
the language a n d casual interaction.

2.1.4. R e p e t i t i o n
While analyzing the specificity of film dialogue Kozloff makes a point
about repetition w h e n she writes:

Repetition in film dialogue may at times exist to mimic normal

conversational habit, but primarily it stems from aesthetic
motivations. ... The artistry of film scripts can be traced to their
recurrent patterns.
[Kozloff 2000. 84]

In the two sequences I have been analyzing so far there is frequent

repetition on the phoneme level. The alliteration in case of consonants / p r /
in priest, prick (line 4) h a s been already mentioned above. Another repetition
exists in the s a m e utterance when the s o u n d of / j u : / can be heard twice.
Staying in the s a m e line, the next sentence is full of alliterative s o u n d s too.
The s o u n d of the c o n s o n a n t / r / is heard five times in mother's crying at
funeral, her a n d turkey. The same utterance reveals another alliteration of
consonants in gonna goose. The fact that s u c h a dense use of specific sound
patterning is not j u s t a matter of coincidence is evident from other examples.
The expression pulled my punches (line 12) used by Eddie is another
example of alliteration par excellence. The u s e of five phonemes / k / in
Henry's most condensed and alliterative line 18 proves the aesthetic

26
motivation Kozloff mentions. The rhythm created by the chain of words cunt
stinks like carpet cleaner suggests the poetic quality of foregrounding.
Mukařovský claims:

In poetic language foregrounding achieves maximum intensity to

the extent of pushing communication into background as the
objective of expression and of being used for its own sake; it is not
used in the services of communication, but in order to place in the
foreground of the expression, the act of speech itself.
[Cited in Fowler, 96]
I have shown a n u m b e r of features at the phonic level of the utterance,
comparing the frequent elisions in the language u s e in t h e screenplay and
the movie soundtrack. The poetic function of the condensed and repetitive
sound patterning h a s been verified.

27
 2.2. Morphosyntactic Level

At this level I will briefly examine the way words are combined in the
dialogue. The first phenomenon I have noticed is the fact t h a t most
sentences are simple and short. The frequent u s e of contracted forms a n d
REDUCED constructions can be traced in the dialogue. There are 22
different contracted forms employed in the 26 lines uttered by the dyad in
the two scenes of the film. Here they are grouped chronologically as they are
employed in the interaction:

TABLE III:
CONTRACTED FORMS

gotta gotta
gonna wanna
mother's mother's
gonna that's
he's can't
I'm can't
don't can't
must've can't
I'll I'd
don't what's
gotta what's

The tendency towards monosyllabic word u s e in spoken English is

evident. The informality stemming from s u c h a density of contracted forms is
also transparent.
As if the n u m b e r of syllables were not sufficient, the use of REDUCED
constructions m a k e s the sentences even shorter. An ungrammatical form
occurs in the first sentences in line 5. There the verb be is missing as well in
the following sentence where instead of grammatically more correct you had
or you'd better a less s t a n d a r d phrase you better is used. A similar example
of REDUCTION can be found in line 11. The personal pronoun I is omitted

28
from the utterance altogether by Henry, as well as the verb be in t h e
following sentence of the same line. The personal p r o n o u n appearing in the
screenplay is skipped once more from the utterance in the line 14 of the
soundtrack. In both samples of REDUCED constructions, the subject
shifted and t h u s the subjective word order is employed here. The same
feature is traceable in the second sentence of Eddie's line 24. The subject is
present only in the screenplay, b u t not in the soundtrack. These are pieces
of evidence of a high degree of e m o t i v e n e s s and informality in the usage of
language practiced by Henry a n d Eddie too. One example of s u c h a word
order where a rheme of the utterance is p u t in the beginning of the sentence
can be found in the Eddie' s emotionally condensed utterance on line 13.
The scripted version of the sentence is: What the hell are you on tonight, punk?
However, in the movie Eddie's angry question is made more dismissive and
direct by the u s e of the vulgar f-word in the initial position of the utterance
and by another use of REDUCED construction (See GLOSSARY OF TERMS).
The phonetic resemblance of the morphemes what and fuck is taken
advantage of as this kind of substitution helps to intensify the illocutionary
force of the utterance. Structural simplification is also present in the
sentence since the verb be is missing again.
At this moment, it is necessary to discuss the terms ELLIPSIS and
structural simplification in a more general sense. As mentioned above the
film dialogue excessively employs REDUCED construction. Writing about the
notion of structural compression or "reduction of complexity of constituent
structure," Leech points out t h a t one of the devices of simplification
responsible for s u c h compression "is the process of anaphoric reference by
which repeated semantic content may be omitted altogether ('ellipsis')"
[Leech 1974. 193-194]. This type of omission, i.e. ellipsis, occurs in the
analyzed segment of the screenplay version of the film dialogue as mentioned
above [Now instead of later!). Crystal specifies ELLIPSIS as a "term used in
GRAMMATICAL analysis to refer to a SENTENCE where, for reasons of
economy, emphasis or style, a p a r t of the STRUCTURE h a s been omitted,

29
which is recoverable from a scrutiny of the CONTEXT" [Crystal 1985. 107].
Crystal also mentions t h a t s u c h sentences are referred to as REDUCED,
CONTRACTED or 'abbreviated' constructions. The term REDUCED h a s been
used in relation to the film dialogue. Furthermore, h e claims t h a t "'elliptical'
constructions are a n essential feature of everyday conversation, b u t the
rules governing their occurrence have received little study" [108, see
GLOSSARY OF TERMS]. Moreover, Fowler reminds u s of the fact that:
Ellipsis is a very important cohesive device in dialogue,
a guarantee that speakers are concentrating together on a single
topic. In Actional dialogue, ellipsis suggests intimacy, intensity.
[Fowler 1996. 85]

This claim is highly relevant to the film dialogue analysis since it

brings evidence t h a t intimacy and structural simplification (REDUCTION),
including ellipsis, are interrelated. This will be dealt also in the following
Chapter Three.
T h u s it can be stated that contracted forms, subjective word order,
substitution a n d REDUCED constructions in the film dialogue m a k e the
verbal acts more colloquial, more direct as well as more intimate. The
soundtrack version of the interaction shows a higher frequency of s u c h
strategies and is t h u s in many cases slightly more informal and intensified
t h a n the screenplay.

The examples mentioned above:

That'(s) the best
(ľ) remember
you (are) out of brew
(you're) lookin'
Fuck (What the hell are) you on tonight?

30
 2.3. Lexical Choices

At this level I will show which words are used by the characters,
comparing t h e informality of t h e word p h r a s e s already present in the
screenplay with a n even more intensly informal version in the soundtrack.
The two following chronological lists of word phrases show w h a t expressions
Henry a n d Eddie use to address each other:

TABLE IV:
FORMS OF ADDRESS

HENRY: EDDIE:

you ya
you scumbag
you faggot
you prick cheap punk
you your head
hey boy youfaggot
barkeep you
you you
Eddie fuck you
you your life
you you
your mother's you
Eddie you
sucker
fuckin' rummy

What is seen here is the frequent use of the personal pronoun by both
characters; this reveals a high degree of intimacy between them. Henry uses
the first n a m e Eddie twice, showing his negative intimacy. In Eddie's usage
there are more derogatory terms expressing contempt since they address
Henry a s either a male homosexual (twice), disrespected person [scumbag,
punk, sucker) or an unreformed alcoholic (rummy).
It can also be seen that Henry u s e s vulgar slang expressions in a
slightly more intricate way. This can be seen in the line 18 which h a s been
mentioned in connection with the sound patterning above. Eddie's u s e of

31
expletive slang seems to be simpler and more straightforward. For instance,
he utters the f-word 6 times in the 26 lines of the two scenes in the movie,
while no such instance can be found in Henry's t u r n s . This disproportion in
the use of words may possibly reveal the difference in the characters' level of
education or intelligence, although intelligent a n d educated people can u s e f-
words quite often, especially when drinking alcohol. However, from the
context of the speech situation low social s t a t u s can be detected in the
interaction.
When identifying the discrepancies between the written and spoken
realizations of the dialogue, the intensifier you can be found before the
address form prick being used in the line 4. Then in the following sentence
the sounds of the interjections oh (preceding the sole scripted word shit) and
oh hey are added to the scripted dialogue as well as the victorious, as if self-
directed interjection hey baby, which is uttered by Henry in a moment when
Eddie seems to be beaten. Each of these three interjections serves a different
function in the utterance:
1) The first oh shit is a clear reaction to a particularly heavy blow in the
stomach.
2) The following oh hey is a way of addressing Eddie. A similar u s e of the
same interjection can be found in line 16, when Henry reacts in
disappointment to a cigarette thrown into his beer.
3) The actor's prolonged and relieved delivery of the third interjection in
line 4 hey boby, impregnates the two words with a feeling of complacency.
Henry smiles a little and closes his eyes while uttering this short expression,
only to be caught unprepared by Eddie's fist in the face. The expression hey
baby is used for the purpose of the film narration. At first sight it seems to
have a monologue-like character. However, this is only an illusion because
the short speech h a s been inserted in the movie to communicate with the
spectators. T h u s another layer of interaction is established. The film
dialogue is structured to take the spectators into consideration.

32
 When Eddie verbally addresses Henry for the second time while kicking
into belly he u s e s a couple of derogatory terms: Scumbag! Faggot! Once
again, these words of hate and disgust are not in the original screenplay.
Have they been chosen to make t h e film dialogue more effective, emotive and
expressive or is their presence in the soundtrack a matter of coincidence?
The latter is very unlikely as it is important for the revelation of character.
This fact brings u s to the interpretation of the pragmatic meaning.

33
 CHAPTER THREE
Film Discourse, Pragmatic Meaning, Style

In Chapter Three I will analyze the speech events and suggest a

tentative pragmatic interpretation of the film dialogue. The dominant part of
the interpretation will be showing the strategies according to which the
dialogue is constructed to communicate information to the audience, i.e. the
meaning construction. In other words I will analyze the discourse of the
film dialogue. For this purpose, the characteristic features a n d functions of
a film dialogue need to be considered.
Writing a b o u t t h e nature of film dialogue, Kozloff claims that:
[.] film dialogue is purposely designed for the viewer to overhear,
so that we can draw the best hypotheses, but films disguise the
extend to which the words are truly meant for the off-screen
listener. Part of the film-going suspension of disbelief is to
collaborate in this fiction.
[Kozloff 2000. 15-16]
Therefore, for the comparative discourse analysis of the screenplay and
soundtrack version of the piece of film dialogue in Barfly, it will be
fundamental to show how the dialogue is designed, i.e. constructed, for the
viewer to overhear.
Furthermore, Kozloff refines understanding of the film dialogue by
distinguishing it from:

1. stage dialogue
2. dialogue in novels
3. spontaneous everyday speech
[See Kozloff 2000.15-19]
In relation to 1, the film dialogue is claimed to be different in
two principal ways:
A) by the simultaneous signification of camera work/mise-en-
scěne/editing that serves to select, emphasize, undercut,
distract, reveal, or deform the filmgoer's interpretation

34
 B) by the phenomenological absence of the actors from the
filmgoers' space and reality, which allows the spectators'
cathexis 4 with the characters more free play
[Kozloff 2000.17]

In relation to 2, Kozloff observations are as follows:

Film dialogue is distinguished from dialogue in novels by die
absence of the literary narrator who could expliciüy summarize or
interpret the characters' speeches or even render interior views of
the characters' minds and emotions. Instead of a narrator
sequentially contextualizing the characters' speech, film offers the
simultaneous signification of camera work/mise-en-scěne/editing.
Moreover, the difference between reading words printed on a page
and hearing them spoken aloud by actors is immeasurable.
[Kozloff 2000.17]

In connection to 3, Kozloff mentions several claims relevant for the

further interpretation of the meaning of the film dialogue.

In narrative films, dialogue may strive mightily to imitate natural

conversation, but it is always an imitation. It has been scripted,
written and rewritten, censored, polished, rehearsed, and
performed. Even when lines are improvised on the set, they have
been spoken by impersonators, judged, approved, and allowed to
remain. Then all dialogue is recorded, edited, mixed, underscored,
and played through stereophonic speakers with Dolby sound. The
actual hesitations, repetitions, digressions, grunts, interruptions,
and mutterings of everyday speech have either been pruned away,
or, if not, deliberately included. Less time is devoted to the actual
functions of everyday discourse, such as merely establishing
social contact (what Roman Jakobson calls "phatic function") or
confirming that a conversation is that speakers should not tell
each other what the other already knows, film dialogue is often
forced to smuggle in information merely for the viewer's benefit.
Because the words are in truth directed at the filmgoer, not at the
on-screen conversationalists, each word does double duty, works
on double layers.
[Kozloff 2000.18-19]

In the chapter devoted to the functions of dialogue in narrative film,

Kozloff explains t h a t when analyzing a segment of film dialogue one should

4
n. pi. cathexes
Concentration of emotional energy on an object or idea

35
ask: "Why are these lines here?" or "What purpose do they serve in the text
as a whole?" Kozloff identifies nine functional categories of a film dialogue.
The first grouping concerns functions of a film dialogue in relation to the
narrative:

1) anchorage of the diegesis and characters

2) communication of narrative causality
3) enactment of the narrative events
4) character revelation
5) adherence to the code of realism
6) control of viewer evaluation and emotions

The second grouping, as Kozloff claims, goes "beyond narrative

communication into t h e realm of aesthetic effect, ideological persuasion a n d
commercial appeal":

7) exploitation of the resources of language

8) thematic messages/authorial commentary/allegory
9) opportunities for "star turns"
[Kozloff 2000. 33-34]

Such a division will be helpful in describing the film discourse of the

film dialogue in Barfly. I will focus on the ways the distinctiveness of film
dialogue is reflected in the analyzed piece of verbal interaction as well as on
the location of the film dialogue functions mentioned above. By
concentrating on the ways the verbal interactions between the characters are
used to fulfil the functions, the discourse of the film dialogue can be
disclosed. In other words, the focus will be on the ways the interaction
between characters structures the spectator's reception of what is seen on
the screen. Thus, at a general level, the crucial question also concerns t h e
relationships of t h e word and image in the film.

After the introduction of the general characteristics and functions of

the film dialogue, I will concentrate on contextualizing and interpreting the
pragmatic meaning of the actual segment of the film dialogue. In order to do
so, I will proceed with the comparison of the screenplay and the soundtrack

36
versions of the dialogue with the intention to point out the shifts in the
pragmatic meaning. The SPEAKING grid proposed by Hymes will be used for
the context description [See Thomas 1995.188].

3.1. Situation

The situation or setting in which the analyzed dialogue, i.e. speech

event, takes place can be understood on two levels:
1) The audio-visual film setting of the s p e e c h event
constructed by the simultaneous signification of the "film
audio-visual narrator", i.e. the camera work, mise-en-scene 5
and editing where the verbal exchange between interlocutors
is designed purposefully for the overhearing spectator. In fact
the channel can be described as two on-screen characters
communicating information to the audience by performing a
film dialogue.
2) The abstract social setting of t h e s p e e c h event
related to the on-screen interlocutors having face-to-face
conversation.

Despite the fact that the two settings are intertwined it will be
productive to have the two different levels in mind because of the "double
duty" of the word used in film. [See Kozloff above]
Firstly, I will again concentrate on Scene One, in which a viewer sees
and hears Eddie a n d Henry for the first time. For the understanding of the
audiovisual film setting the work of camera, mise-en-scěne a n d editing will
be discussed.
The camera p a n s into the "Golden Horn" bar after the first opening
images of several "lowlife bars" [Bukowski, 1987.13] are shown. The camera
5
mise-en-scěne tu The arrangement of performers and properties on a stage for a theatrical production or
before the camera in a film.

37
p a n s down to the entrance door, the screen is all in black. The door opens
with a creaking sound and the interior of the b a r is exposed. The camera
goes slowly onward. The bartender J i m calmly reading a newspaper can be
seen. The place looks dark, old and shabby. The camera continues to p a n to
the rear entrance leading to the back alley. The image is accompanied by
electric blues music. Apart from the bartender there is nobody in the
darkened place. However, a multitude of excited voices can be heard more
distinctly. The camera stops while showing the rear entrance of the bar. The
strong voice of Eddie shouting his first line is h e a r d off-screen then a
s u d d e n detail of Henry's face saying his first line c a n be seen and heard on­
screen.
The reason why I have used such a detailed description of the opening
sequence of the movie is to show the way the work of camera, mise-en-scěne
and editing replace the literary narrator of the story. They do so in
accordance with conventions created during film history. The slow move of
the camera into the dark space of the bar suggests a mystery and gives rise
to spectator's expectation. One of the conventions u s e d in Hollywood
narrative movies is the audio-visual continuity editing (see GLOSSARY OF
TERMS), which is used to avoid confusing the audience as to the geography
of a scene and the position of things and characters. Time a n d space, image
and s o u n d are synchronized and presented in a continuous fashion so as
not to disturb the viewer's expectation most of the time. Disturbing a viewer
by separating the image from the sound in using a n off-screen utterance is
done on purpose to keep the spectator in suspense and t h u s attract more
attention. To u s e the Fowler's term, it is a type of defamiliarization of t h e
film audio-visual narration. Moreover, such use of utterance is a part of
the strategy of the filmmakers of Barfly and a way of employing the sixth
function of film dialogue as described in Kozloff a n d mentioned above
(control of viewer evaluation and emotions). The fact t h a t Eddie's first line,
All y a gotta do is beg for a little mercy, is heard off-screen changes its
meaning in the context of the actual film setting. The u n s e e n source and the

38
emotionality of Eddie's utterance attract the viewer's attention. At the same
time, the utterance, being uttered off-screen, can be regarded as less
prominent in relation to the character's revelation. Even more so when
compared to the on-screen setting of the first utterance of Henry. Henry's
unshaven, battered, and bleeding face uttering the first words is revealed
closely after Eddie's u n s e e n utterance. It is understood t h a t Henry's words
and Henry's character in general are made more prominent t h a n Eddie's
words by m e a n s of the film narration, more exactly by editing. The spectator
is informed about the Henry's privileged position by the discourse of the film
narration. Another piece of evidence supporting the claim is the long shot
showing Henry lying cdone in his own blood on the ground while the crowd of
people is heading back to the bar with congratulations f or Eddie in the end of
Scene One. T h u s the verbal interaction is opened as well as closed by the
shot of Henry. This is an example of the relationship between t h e audio-
visual film s e t t i n g and the film dialogue. It is evident t h a t the interpretation
of the pragmatic meaning of the dialogue is highly dependent on the film
discourse a n d vice versa. The way camera reveals the characters is related to
the paralinguistic feature of the utterances. For example, the extremely
deformed facial expressions seen during the fistfights are the instances of
paralinguistic features expressing high-strung emotiveness of the characters'
verbal acts.
Comparing the screenplay a n d soundtrack version of the dialogue a
shift of the setting is evident. The first is an instance of written language
used for the purpose of the film in the later. In the film, the words from
screenplay are uttered by the impersonators which can be heard by the
audience. Therefore the dialogue in the soundtrack is a piece of spoken
language used in film. The interpretative and summarizing function of the
film "audio-visual narrator" is absent in the screenplay's written form. More
precisely, t h e on-screen audio-visual setting is only suggested there. The
interpretation of the pragmatic meaning of the dialogue is dependent on the
context of t h e film narration. The audio-visual, i.e. the s o u n d and image

39
 information given to the audience in the course of the film narration gives
clues for understanding the dialogue.
The first scene exposes of the characters in the film. After the fistfight,
it is clearer who the main character is. Between the two scenes and further
on the film narration proceeds a n d gives more information about the attitude
of Henry toward Eddie.
The next day after the first fistfight Henry goes to the "Golden Horn" and
speaks with the day bartender Jim Jim advises Henry: "Henry, you oughta stop
fight Eddie. You don't even have a reason, that's why you lose every fight."
Henry answers: "I could whip him without a reason because I got the guts...
hey, I got the guts... but the guts need fuel." Then he steals a sandwich from a
fat customer and eats saying again: "All I need is little fuel! That's all I need to
whip Eddie." Then he has a drink "on the cuff' and goes to his cheap hotel
apartment In the hotel he is seen writing something on a piece of paper listening
classical music on the radio. His voice can be heard over the image saying:

HENRY v. HENRY
Voice Over Monologue in Henry's Apartment
Listening to Mozart and Writing
THE ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY SOUNDTRACK
(p. 27)
A /voice-over/ S o m e people never go crazy. What truly
Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible horrible lives t h e y m u s t live.
lives they m u s t lead.
B / t o himself/ Oh shiň Come on.

Henry's monologue-like utterance gives further information about the

functions of the film dialogue. Henry's utterance serves the character
revelation in the film when expressing his personal attitude toward people
and their craziness. It is a n example of a stylized voice-over monologue, in
which, in fact, Henry communicates with himself and at the same time with
the audience. In this sense, the utterance can be considered as dialogic.
Furthermore, while reading his poetry Henry's voice over is addressing some
people, expressing his contempt of them. However, Henry does not
pronounce the words. Spectator/hearer in a movie theatre is informed only
by the voice of the actor through speaking the loudspeakers. The actor on­
screen does not open his mouth. Thus the convention of the use of sound in

40
film is employed. A monologue, during which a character speaks to oneself is
a rare phenomenon in American movies and is often presented in a form of
voice-over, suggesting the words going on in mind of the on-screen character.
What will also be important for the discourse analysis are the incongruities
of the screenplay a n d the soundtrack realization of the dialogue. However,
the shifts in pragmatic meaning of the speech acts in the film dialogue will
be dealt with later the sub-chapter 3.4.

Further on in the movie, Henry is seen waking up stealing food and whiskey
from another apartment eating, drinking and smoking and listening to the radio. Then
at night he goes to the "Golden Horn" again and the second scene with Eddie begins.
During the scene it is Henry who is the centre of camera attention. The scene ends
with Henry leaving Eddie lying on the ground. He goes slowly through the silent
crowd of people who seem to be shocked by his victory. He exchanges a smile with
an old barfly and goes to the bar. Then asks Ben, the substituting bartender, for beer
but Eddie, who is now in caring hands of women, shakes his head saying "No!" to
Ben who is thus force to refuse to serve Henry. Henry leaves... etc.

It can be seen from the context description that in both scenes with
Henry and Eddie the setting of the verbal interaction takes place in the
"Golden Horn", which is supposed to be a lower class bar in Los Angeles.
The abstract social setting of the speech situation in the first scene can be
called a fistfight a n d take place among dustbins in the back alley of the bar.
The situation in the second scene might be characterized as a bar talk
leading to a fistfight. During the b a r talk, the informality of the situation is
slightly reduced t h a n during the fistfights, because Henry and Eddie occupy
their typical places. Henry sits in front of the bar and Eddie moves behind it.
Generally speaking, both scenes are informal speech situations set in a place
where social n o r m s tend to be violated, where people drink alcohol heavily,
smoke and m a k e dirty jokes. It is a place where old prostitutes sexually
satisfy costumers in the toilet a n d especially a bar where a bartender is
regularly having fights with one of the customers, i.e. barflies. As it is
scripted by Bukowski, the bar is a lowlife setting.

41
 3.2. Participants

The two young males, Henry and Eddie, are the interlocutors. The
former is a regular a t t e n d a n t of the b a r and the later is the night bartender,
which shows a difference in their s t a t u s . I have mentioned the prominence of
Henry' s character underlined by the audio-visual film setting which h a s
an impact on t h e viewers' interpretation. Nevertheless, Henry is portrayed
as a loner, an outcast, even in the bar he frequents. He is the one the crowd
does not cheer for. He is often unemployed and unlucky. He seems to be
living in a world going nowhere. However, from Henry's point of view
everybody lives in s u c h a world, whether living in a b a r or a big family house.
This attitude can be understood from the words he says in a comparatively
long contribution addressed to Jim, the day bartender who is one of the few
people in the film who seem not to hate Henry:

This is a world where everybody's got to do something. You

know, somebody laid down this rule that everybody's got to
do something, you got to be something - you know, a dentist,
a glider pilot, a narc, janitor, a preacher. All that.
Sometimes I just get tired thinking of all the things I don't
want to do, of all the things I don't want to be, of all the
places I don't want to go, like India, like get my teeth
cleaned, ehm, save the whale. All that. I don't understand it.
The Jim's answer is: You're not supposed to think about it. I
think the whole trick is not to think about it.
[See Bukowski 1987.69-70]

As opposed to Henry, Eddie does not think about s u c h issues. He is

the quintessence of the stereotypical macho personality, who m u s t
"prove... some thing continually but...never asks himself why" [Bukowski
1987.3]. Masculine physical and sexual dominance seems to be the only
things he lives for. He h a s a job and is respected by the surrounding people.
He is the one the crowd cheers for. For a more detailed illustration of the
characters, see the scripted character descriptions in the Appendix.

42
 At the s a m e time, Eddie and Henry are both fictitious characters
represented by actors (Rourke, Stallone). Moreover, Henry's role is played by
a contemporary film star, which is also significant for the understanding of
the Hollywood film context. Rourke plays a role of Henry Chinaski who is the
alter ego of Charles Bukowski, a famous poet, writer and the author of the
screenplay. It h a s already been claimed t h a t the film dialogue is distinctive
by the fact t h a t the audience is inherently present in it. T h u s viewers are in
the participants' dialogue, too. They are hearers, or, as Kozloff writes,
"overhearers" of the verbal interaction. As h a s also been stated above, the
dialogue takes the audience into consideration by the way it is used. More
specifically, it is the viewer's "horizon of expectation" which is important for
the construction of the film dialogue [see Kozloff 2000.138]. Part of the
audience expectation may also be the fact t h a t Henry represents the young
Charles Bukowski.

3.3. Ends

In the course of the two dialogues, individual goals are at play. What is
the goal of Eddie in the first scene? The explicit goal is t h a t Eddie wants to
win the fight. In the first three lines ( 1 , 3 and 6) he utters he expresses his
will to offend a n d humiliate Henry and t h u s show his superiority a n d
dominance. At the same time, Eddie wants to show-off his masculinity by
beating Henry verbally as well as physically.
Henry's goals seem to be more ambiguous. According to the
screenplay's character description, he is an unsuccessful, possibly mad and
disowned suicidal character who is poor, who drinks and who "fears the life
of the dull a n d the damned..." [See c h a r a c t e r s d e s c r i p t i o n ] . At the level of
explicit meaning, he wants to offend and humiliate Eddie, too, as seen from
the utterance h e uses. However, his motivation is implicitly different which
becomes clearer from the context of the film narration. As h a s been
mentioned above in the description of the scenes preceding the second

43
dialogic sequence, h e claims he can beat Eddie without a reason, only
because he h a s "got the guts but the guts need fuel" [Bukowski 1987.24].
From this it can be understood t h a t Henry is simply thirsty a n d hungry. His
individual goal is to survive. What he needs for survival is alcohol and food.
Henry seems to be aware of Eddie's aggressively masculine attitudes also
because of the fact t h a t they both seem to know each other well. This is
evident from the language they u s e as h a s been analyzed above, when
closeness and negative intimacy is detected in the use of language, as will
be developed in the next section. However, according to the character
description, Henry also w a n t s to die, b u t he is unable to do it. Therefore, in
general, he may like to be beaten, however, not by Eddie, who symbolizes the
dull life Henry fears. These are briefly the individual goals of the dyad in the
interaction.
Nevertheless, there is also a goal related to the film discourse of the
analyzed dialogue. The words u s e d are m e a n t to interact not only between
Henry and Eddie b u t between the film narration and the audience. The
context of the audiovisual film setting and Kozloff s functions of a film
dialogue are at play. From s u c h perspective, the goals of these two particular
dialogic sequences are related to the functions. The function responsible for
the control of viewer evaluation and e m o t i o n s h a s already been
mentioned in the section devoted to SITUATION where it h a s been shown
how the "audio-visual film narrator" helps to construct the meaning of the
dialogue.
In relation with the goals of the interaction, this function is realized in
the two sequences as well. Viewers are supposed to be entertained, drawn
into participation and identify with the characters by m e a n s of the dialogue
construction.
The second dominant function that can be observed in this context is
the character revelation. Viewers are exposed to this function more
significantly in the first scene because here they receive the first information
about the characters. The exposition of characters mirrored in their use of

44
language will be partly in focus in the next section devoted to speech acts, in
other words, to the verbal behaviour of the characters in the movie.

3.4. Act Sequences, Key and Instruments

The message form of the illocutionary acts in the speech event h a s

been thoroughly analysed in the previous chapters. However, the message
content of the utterances h a s been insufficiently touched upon. In relation to
the making meaning, the form and the content of the utterance are
interrelated and inseparable.
The observation of language u s e leads u s to the claim t h a t the actual
spoken dialogue h a s been evidently, even though slightly, changed on some
occasions on behalf of the expansion of informality of the language and the
casualty of the interaction (see Chapter Two, 2.1.3). Another a n d maybe an
even more important observation is t h a t contracted forms, subjective word
order, substitution and REDUCED constructions in the dialogue are used
extensively on many occasions a n d t h u s make the verbal acts more
colloquial, more direct as well a s more intimate. Moreover, it h a s been
proved that the utterances in the soundtrack of the movie reinforce s u c h
strategies. This h a s lead to the conclusion that the interaction in the
soundtrack of the movie is slightly more informal and intensified (see
Chapter Two, 2.2). What this m e a n s for the pragmatic understanding of the
film dialogue might be more t r a n s p a r e n t in agreement with Kozloff:
However, so-called "elliptical" dialogue implies a special
closeness amongst the characters, they speak to each other in a
shorthand fashion, they understand mysterious prior references,
and their minds are moving in the same speed. The viewer is put
in an inferior position, shut out from the closeness, trying to
catch up. Screenwriters regularly quicken the pace by starting a
scene in the middle of a conversation, thus forcing the viewer
hurriedly to infer the elided moments.
[Kozloff 2000.74]
Indeed, the first scene of the movie starts in the middle of the fistfight
conversation. Viewers' emotions and evaluationsare t h u s controlled as the

45
"overhearers" have to increase their attention to u n d e r s t a n d the dialogue's
meaning. This is especially so, if the form of the dialogue is as excessively
"elliptical" 6 and informal a s the soundtrack interaction is in the two analyzed
sequences of verbal interaction. The audience is excluded from the closeness
existing between the two characters. However, the spectators become more
involved in the conversation by the employment of the REDUCED
constructions of utterances. The notion of informality and closeness brings
back the social scales' evaluation and the problem of intimacy which h a s
been dealt with in the beginning of the analysis. It is necessary to
distinguish between various linguistic m e a n s expressing intimacy in order to
define the different degrees of intimate verbal behaviour on the scale
between positive a n d negative. The distinction is highly dependent on the
context of the speech act. Hence a closer look at the particular speech acts
from the socio-pragmatic point of view is needed. The changes m a d e in the
soundtrack version of the utterance in contrast to the original screenplay
will again be observed in order to disclose the film dialogue specificity, i.e.
the discourse of the film dialogue. In other words, I will look for the shifts
occurring in the soundtrack version in contrast to the screenplay version of
t h e dialogue.
I distinguish four basic speech acts; STATEMENT, INQUIRY,
DIRECTIVE and EXCLAMATION. By observing the occurrence of the speech
acts during the course of the two segments of dialogue, while comparing its
screenplay and soundtrack version, the pragmatic meaning of the piece of
verbal interaction in the film dialogue will be revealed.

6 See discussion of 'ellipsis' above in Chapter Two.

46
TABLE V:
SPEECH ACT C>CCUIIRENCE7
- EDDIE - HENRY
Line Speech Act Line S p e e c h Act
1 STATEMENT 2 STATEMENT
DIRECTIVE
3 DIRECTIVE 4 STATEMENT
EXCLAMATION
6 EXCLAMATION 5 EXCLAMATION
INQUIRY
STATEMENT
EXCLAMATION
7 STATEMENT 8 EXCLAMATION
EXCLAMATION DIRECTIVE
10 STATEMENT 9 EXCLAMATION
STATEMENT
INQUIRY
12 STATEMENT 11 STATEMENT
EXCLAMATION INQUIRY
DIRECTIVE
13 EXCLAMATION 14 STATEMENT
INQUIRY STATEMENT
15 STATEMENT 16 EXCLAMATION
DIRECTIVE DIRECTIVE
STATEMENT
17 EXCLAMATION 18 STATEMENT
INQUIRY
19 EXCLAMANTION 25 EXCLAMATION
20 EXCLAMATION - -
DIRECTIVE
21 STATEMENT - -
22 STATEMENT - -
23 (STATEMENT) - -
24 EXCLAMATION
INQUIRY
STATEMENT
26 (INQUIRY)
EXCLAMATION
INQUIRY

TABLE VI:
FREEQENCY OF OCCURENCES
- total EDDIE total HENRY TOTAL both
STATEMENTS 8 7 15
INQUIRY 5 2 7
DIRECTIVE 5 2 7
EXCLAMATION 9 7 16

7
The speech acts printed in bold letters are added to the screenplay version of the dialogue. The speech acts in
the brackets are omitted in the soundtrack version of the dialogue.

47
 It can be said t h a t the function of utterances becomes more
changeable. Let u s take Eddie's first line which h a s the syntactic structure
of a statement: All ya gotta do is beg for a little mercy. Meanwhile, the
dominant intonation; the emphasized word beg being the intonation nucleus
of the utterance a n d the high volume and expressivity of the delivery suggest
DIRECTIVE function of Eddie's verbal act. As if the meaning of the first part
of the sentence All ya gotta were reduced while the illocutionary force of the
second part, beg for a little mercy, were intensified in the soundtrack version
of the utterance. In line 2, Henry expresses his attitude in the form a
statement [Quitting to you would be like swallowing piss for eternity). Once
again, the intonation suggests extreme emotion and expresses his negative
attitude toward Eddie's preceding DIRECTIVE STATEMENT since the vulgar
slang word piss is emphasized. Thus the statement can be interpreted as
exclamatory, expressing Henry's activated emotions. Furthermore, the
utterance is underlined paralinguistically. The detail shot of Henry's twisted
face during the utterance intensify the emotion a n d expressiveness of the
statement.
"The audio-visual narrator" manifests the paralinguistic features of the
utterance and t h u s underlines and intensifies the illocutionary force of the
speech acts in the soundtrack version of the film dialogue.
To expand the idea it should be noticed t h a t the first two lines of Eddie
are uttered off the movie screen. The camera prefers to concentrate on
showing Henry's speaking face in the beginning of the first scene. This
corresponds to the movie narrative, in which Henry plays the leading role
and to the first opportunity of the "star turn". In addition to the
undercutting of Eddie's speech by the ignorance of the camera, Eddie's
utterance in line 3 is also shortened compared to the screenplay:
3 I Eddie: Come on, give it up! Now instead of later! Come on, give it up!
/off-screen/

Low Degree «. High Degree

48
 It can be seen, t h a t the second part of the screenplay of the
DIRECTIVE speech act is omitted from the soundtrack version. The choice of
camera and w h a t is more the REDUCED structure of the speech act cause a
shift in the meaning of the utterance as the illocutionary force is weakened.
Not only is Eddie's speech made less prominent b u t it also quickens the pace
of the interaction. Moreover, by omitting the elliptical second sentence (Now
instead of late!) a n d by the choice of the camera, the degree of negative
intimacy in this utterance is slightly reduced in the soundtrack as is seen on
8
the scale.
In contrast to this, Henry's speech is made more prominent a n d
reinforced in the soundtrack version of the dialogue. His responses are
certainly longer and more importantly they are made longer in the
soundtrack t h a n in the screenplay:

4 Henry: You're going to need the priest, prick. And You gonna need the priest, y o u prick. And when
while your mother's crying a t the funeral I'm going your mother's crying at the funeral I'm gonna goose
to goose her with a turkey neck! her with a turkey neck! ...HEY, BABY...

Low Degree . _ » High Degree 9

5 Henry: Shit...that the best you can do? You better Oh, shit.„oh, hey, that the best you can do? You
phone for help. better phone for help.

Low Degree ._» High Degree

8 For complete chronological evaluation of the degrees of negative intimacy in the film dialogue see
the scales of negative intimacy in the Appendix
9 Legend t o the scales:

s t a n d s for the degree of negative intimacy in the screenplay

« s t a n d s for the degree of negative intimacy in the soundtrack when it is reduced

» s t a n d s for the degree of negative intimacy in the soundtrack when it is extended

49
 It can be seen t h a t the final speech act of EXCLAMATION, HEY, BABY,
is added to the screenplay dialogue in the soundtrack version of Henry's
utterance in line 4. Similarly, the screenplay's initial EXCLAMATION shit is
expanded in oh shit... oh hey in the soundtrack.

The utterance in line 4 and 5 bear a complex u s e of EXCLAMATION.

The functions of the interjections (hey baby, oh shit, oh hey) h a s already
been mentioned in relation to the grammatical level (see Chapter Two).
Interjections constitute the speech act of EXCLAMATION, expressing the
speaker's feeling. However, different types of exclamatory functions are used
here. The interjection you prick (line 4) in the soundtrack as opposed to the
sole u s e of prick in the screenplay is marked by intonation in the film. The
preceding and following statement are intensified while made more
negatively emotional a n d expressive. Furthermore, the force of the
illocutionary act is intensified by the image and sound of Henry's fist p u n c h
into the Eddie's belly. The sound of the blow is synchronized with t h e sound
of the aspirated plosive / p / in prick. The following interjection hey baby
closing the Henry's temporary "win of the argument" serves a n exclamatory
function. In this case, however, the positive emotion is being expressed,
which is accompanied by a gesture of relief and feeling of victory with a calm
tone of the interjection. As h a s been mentioned before (see Chapter Two),
this monologue like utterance is added to the scripted dialogue. In my
opinion, this is done on purpose to communicate with spectators. By s u c h
usage the audience is able to recognize who is the "good" and who the "bad"
guy is as well as who the main character is. This is done on the basis of
positive or negative intimacy. The character of Henry is t h u s revealed more
in the soundtrack by the addition or expansion of the EXCLAMATION.
Three different samples of the exclamatory function of this utterance
can be found in the soundtrack version of the line 5 (Oh, shit...oh, hey, that
the best you can do? You better phone for help). In the initial expression oh
shit, Henry's pain is expressed after h e h a s j u s t received a p u n c h in the face.

50
The short utterance s t a n d s for Henry's speech act of EXCLAMATION
expressing his a b r u p t and uncontrolled feeling and emotion (exclamatory
function 1). After a small pause, the rhetorical mocking question is uttered
while introduced by the exclamatory form of address oh hey missing in the
original screenplay. Henry certainly does not ask for more information from
Eddie b u t r a t h e r his negative attitude is expressed while the degree of the
negative intimacy is increased in the soundtrack version of the dialogue
(exclamatory function 2). The ironic STATEMENT (You better phone f or help)
only intensifies t h e negativity. The three speech acts suggest Henry's
closeness or intimacy as well as his negative attitude toward Eddie.
Emotionality is also marked by the incompleteness in the grammatical
structures of t h e utterances, t h u s the INQUIRY and the STATEMENT can be
considered to have an exclamatory function as well (exclamatory function 3).
Moreover, from the perspective of the film narration, the suspense in
the viewer's reception is created by the fact that Henry exclaims positively at
a wrong time, w h e n the fistfight is not decided yet. By such strategy, viewers
are more involved in the film action. They also have a n opportunity to
identify with t h e leading character. Such observations are fundamental for
the u n d e r s t a n d i n g of the film dialogue discourse.
What is important for the understanding of Henry's verbal behaviour
in the first scene is the expression of his attitudes by the complex u s e of
intimate language. Is this line a n instance of positive or negative intimacy? It
can be argued t h a t it is both. One's conclusion depends on the point of view
and the context of the speech situation.

1. NEGATIVE INTERPRETATION OF INTIMACY SIGNALS

The violation of the Cooperative Principle by m e a n s of the mocking
rhetorical question (oh, hey, that the best you can do?) and irony (You
better phone for help) suggests t h a t the intimacy toward Eddie is highly
negative (even more intensified in the soundtrack).

51
 2. POSITIVE INTERPRETATION OF INTIMACY SYGNALS
In the context of the film narration, the ironical utterance Oh, shit... oh,
hey, that the best you can do? You better phone for help can be interpreted
as positive by the spectator. From the film reception point of view, this form
of speech is used on purpose a n d a comic effect of the movie scene is t h u s
achieved. Such verbal behaviour gives the audience information about
Henry's characteristic features. He is being verbally intimate and funny, and
the viewer may interpret this as a n example of wittiness, boldness, courage
or craziness because of the moment at which Henry utters s u c h mockery.
He is actually in a desperate situation, bloody a n d about to be knocked
down by Eddie. Thus, in s u c h cases, context is crucial for the understanding
of the film dialogue meaning. The soundtrack's addition of the positively
intimate EXCLAMATION, HEY, BABY, helps to construct a positive intimacy
with the audience and m a k e s the character likeable.
On the other hand, the next words Eddie utters while kicking the
prone Henry produce an attitude which is purely negative:

6 Eddie: Scumbag! Faggot!

Low Degree » High Degree

The whole speech act of EXCLAMATION showing Eddie's strong

disrespect for Henry is used only in the soundtrack of the film and is
missing in the screenplay.
The fundamental information is t h a t the two instances of
EXCLAMATION {He baby... a n d Scumbag!!! Faggot!!!), which have been
inserted to the scripted dialogue, express a type of positive intimacy in
Henry's verbal behaviour a n d negative intimacy in Eddie's verbal behaviour.
In this way, characters are revealed by strategies defining the film
discourse of dialogue during t h e fistfight s p e e c h event.

52
 In the time between the two film scenes, Henry utters the monologue
mentioned above. Its special importance is clear in the screenplay and the
soundtrack comparison:
HENRY v. HENRY
Voice Over Monologue in Henry's Apartment
Listening to Mozart and Writing
THE ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY SOUNDTRACK
(p. 27)
A /voice-over/ S o m e people never go crazy. What truly
Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible horrible lives they m u s t live.
lives they m u s t lead.
B / t o himself/ Oh shift Come on.

Low Degree «. High Degree

As can be seen, the screenplay version of the dialogic monologue

consists of speech acts A and B. Speech act A is an example of a
STATEMENT a n d B is an EXCLAMATION. Speech act B expresses Henry's
negative attitude toward himself, his self-critical attitude. More precisely, the
EXCLAMATION shows his negative emotion toward the preceding
STATEMENT. The four word EXCLAMATION h a s been omitted in the film
soundtrack variant of the utterance. The low degree of negative intimacy in
the screenplay's utterance h a s been even more reduced by the omission of
the emotional and self-negating speech act. This causes a shift in the
pragmatic meaning of Henry's verbal act. Once more, Bukowski's screenplay
version is changed on purpose. The Hollywood film discourse of the film
dialogue is t h u s more apparent as the main character represented by the
Hollywood film star (Rourke) is presented slightly more positively a n d
heroically or at least slightly less negatively to the film audience.

The second scene including dialogue during the speech events of the
bar talk and fistfight is loaded with EXCLAMATIONS as well. Emotions are
expressed excessively. It is important to emphasize the fact t h a t I
u n d e r s t a n d the term EXCLAMATION in a more traditional sense. It can be
defined as any emotional utterance, which usually lacks grammatical

53
 structure of a full s e n t e n c e and is marked by strong intonation (see
GLOSSARY OF TERMS above).
During the bar talk speech event the two characters are revealed by
their u s e of language in which attitudes are reflected. Henry and Eddie
interpret the social situation in different ways. Henry acts as if the Eddie's
s t a t u s were equal to his, t h u s denying the fact t h a t Eddie is the bartender
who is in charge of the place. On the other hand, Eddie denies Henry's social
s t a t u s of a respected customer who should be served in a polite way.
However, this is more understandable when the "lowlife" s t a t u s of t h e b a r is
taken into consideration. Nevertheless, it can be argued t h a t both of the
characters violate the Politeness Principle by using language full of negative
intimacy.
The first instance of ordering beer by Henry (line 8: Hey boy, fetch me a
draft!) shows signs of a low degree of intimacy:

8 Henry: Hey, boy! Fetch me a draft! Hey boy, fetch m e a draft!

Low Degree «. High Degree

This is manifested by the casual b u t calm m a n n e r of speech. The only

indication of negativity could be found in Henry's ignorance of the
bartender's respected s t a t u s . The goal of the utterance, obtaining a glass of
beer, is unfulfilled because Eddie ignores him. Nonetheless, since the goal
seems to be very important for Henry (being an alcoholic), the next utterance
is reflected by his anger exemplified by the exclamatory form of address.

9 Henry: Hey, you! You in thatfilthy apron! Hey, you! You in thatfilthy apron!

Low Degree . High Degree

Referring to Eddie by m e a n s of the personal pronoun you twice and

raising his voice significantly (screaming), the illocutionary force is

54
 intensified. The negativity of the EXCLAMATION is indicated by the u s e of
the word f i l t h y a s the nucleus of the second utterance. The enhanced
illocutionary force makes Henry's utterance successful a n d prompts Eddie
into reaction. In the following utterance Eddie shows more distance:

10 Eddie: Seems like all those Muhamad Alis I've I hear a voice down there but I'm sure I don't see
laid on you have rattled your bells. m u c h . It s e e m s like that beating I gave y o u last
night must've rattled your bells, h u h ?

Low Degree •_» High Degree

As can be seen in comparison with the screenplay, the soundtrack

utterance h a s been made longer. The first STATEMENT, I hear a voice down
there but I'm sure I don't see much and the question tag huh? appear only in
the soundtrack version of the utterance. In the attempt to mock Henry,
Eddie utters two STATEMENTS instead of one as is scripted. The
STATEMENTS reflect his a s s u m e d physical a n d social superiority. The
illocutionary force is intensified by emphasizing the words voice and see,
expressing Eddie's ignorance and negative attitude, as well as by the use of
the exclamatory and colloquial form of the tag question huh? Such u s e of the
tag question expands the degree of negative intimacy. It is the only moment
in the dialogue when Eddie u s e s s a r c a s m to offend Henry, which may reveal
something about his poor education and intelligence. Nevertheless, the
sarcasm h a s a comic effect for viewers and the people sitting in the bar.
Henry tops the mockery with a n even stronger degree of sarcasm, using a
rhetorical question, being even more witty and funny:

11 Henry: Look, barkeep, I remember ordering a Remember ordering a draft, barkeep. What, y o u out
draft. You out of brew or h a s your lobotomy brew or has lobotomy finally taken hold, huh?
finally taken hold?

Low Degree ._» High Degree

What can be traced here is the omission of the subject I and the
addition of the word what and the informal question tag huh? in the
soundtrack version.

55
 By accepting the s t a t u s game in the first utterance (using the form of
address barkeep as already mentioned above, p . 19), emphasizing lobotomy
(used metaphorically as a stronger variant of sarcasm) and repeating the
same informal a n d exclamatory question tag as Eddie [huh?), Henry insults,
offends and t h u s makes Eddie angry. Henry u s e s a rhetorical question
intensified by t h e question tag to m a k e fun of Eddie's macho masculinity
and show his disrespect toward him. It is another example of the way
Henry's character is revealed to the audience. By denying the authority of
the bartender, h e is being very bold, courageous, funny a n d crazy.
It is relevant for the comparison of the screenplay and soundtrack that
the informal tag questions are attached to the scripted dialogue, t h u s
making the soundtrack film dialogue more interactive, emphatic a n d emotive.
Another piece of utterance added to the dialogue is found in the line 12:

12 Eddie: Eddie: I'll drive you right through the I'll drive your head right through t h e fucking wall
fucking wall tonight, fag. I pulled my p u n c h e s on tonight, y o u faggot. I pulled m y p u n c h e s on you
you last night... last night...
But don't move!

Low Degree •__» High Degree

A full speech act of DIRECTIVE is added in the end of Eddie's

utterance (But don't move...). In my opinion, this addition not only
emphasizes the negative description of Eddie's character but, more
importantly, it is a clear evidence of the film discourse effect in the dialogue.
It creates suspense, while the viewer is tempted to ask: What will h a p p e n
next?
Another aspect of film discourse is connected with the significance of
paralinguistic features in verbal interaction. It can be explained by the fact
t h a t narrative film is a visual art using the camera as a narrator, while the
image replaces t h e verbal description of the speech situation as mentioned
above. However, the design of the soundtrack dialogue reflects the discourse
of the film narration. Eddie's utterance is made shorter once more in line 13:

56
13 Eddie: What the hell are you on tonight, p u n k ? Fuck y o u on tonight?

Low Degree . » High Degree

The informality and emotionality of the soundtrack version of the

INQUIRY h a s been increased by the u s e of the elliptical structure with the
expletive fuck.
T h u s Eddie's emotional, REDUCED EXCLAMATION and INQUIRY,
Fuck you on tonight?, is a form of a strongly negative and informal rhetorical
question. Regarding the immediate context of the utterance, it can be
understood as a reaction to Henry's non-verbal act, i.e. showing his empty
palm with a hilarious smile on his face when supposed to pay. The non-verbal
act appears to be effective in relation to Henry's interactive goals as h e
insults Eddie a n d leads him gradually into another fistfight. Eddie's reaction
is an instance of a growing degree of negative emotion. It can be seen t h a t
the soundtrack version of Eddie's utterance shows a higher degree of
emotiveness a n d negativity. The illocutionary force is intensified by the u s e
of the f-word substituting a n d abbreviating the slightly more formal
construction "What the hell are you on tonight, punk?' [Bukowski 1987.39]
appearing in the written form in the screenplay. T h u s Eddie's soundtrack
verbal act is made shorter and more emphatic by substituting REDUCED
construction a n d subjective word order as h a s been described above. It m u s t
also be stated t h a t the address punk is omitted without any substitution in
the soundtrack version of the dialogue.
Henry's reaction to Eddie's insulting question is intricate while he
ridicules Eddie with the intimate form of address, my boy in the first
STATEMENT:

14 Henry: You're looking at a new m a n , my boy. I've Lookin' at a new man, my boy. I g o t t a a full tank of
got a full tank of fuel. fuel.

Low Degree •_» High Degree

57
 What is also evident from the comparison of the personal form of
address You're is contracted and t h u s m a k e s the STATEMENT a n d more
intimate in the soundtrack. The screenplay contracted construction I've got a
full tank of fuel is contracted even more in soundtrack by the u s e of even
more colloquial version I gotta full tank of fuel.
In the next line Eddie also employs a powerful and interactively
significant non-verbal act when using his burning cigarette to spoil Henry's
object of desire a n d source of "fuel", i.e. his beer, after saying:

15 I Eddie: You pay me for that goddamned beer! You gotta pay for that goddamned beer, (throws a
burning cigarette into the glass of beer Henry is
holding)
Low Degree High Degree

The illocutionary force of the DIRECTIVE speech act is intensified not

only by Eddie's s u b s e q u e n t non-verbal act b u t also by the use of the
informal modal verb gotta which does not occur in the screenplay.
Henry's strategic u s e of a very low degree (line 16) and a n extremely
high degree of negative intimacy (line 18) results in the escalation of emotion
and t u r n s the speech event of bar talk into a fistfight.

16 j Henry: Eddie, come closer. I want to tell you Oh, Eddie, come close. I wanna tell you something.
j something and I want you hear it good... Come here, I want you hear it good...
Low Degree _._ >> _ High Degree

The employment of the speech act of EXCLAMATION oh before the

DIRECTIVE speech act, is another example of making the soundtrack
dialogue more emotional t h a n the screenplay utterance. The elision of the
final / r / in the scripted word closer is mentioned above. The positive degree
of the adverbial function is used here instead of comparative degree (close-
closer).

17 | Eddie: Yeah? Yeah, or what?

Low Degree » High Degree

58
 Eddie's elliptical INQUIRY is made more aggressive in the soundtrack
t h a n in the screenplay by the addition of the words or what, which increase
the negativity of the speech act by creating suspense. This utterance is the
type of structural condensation mentioned by Leech in the previous Chapter
Two. The semantic content of Henry's previous utterance is not repeated by
Eddie. He reduces his speech act by saying two words only; the rest is being
implied by the context.
In the following utterance, Henry launches the most offensive
STATEMENT.

18 Henry: Your mother's cunt stinks like carpet Your mother's cunt stinks like (sniffs) carpet
cleaner. cleaner.

Low Degree •__» High Degree

The high degree of negative intimacy is reinforced paralinguistically on

the screen when Henry is seen and heard sniffing before the last two words
are uttered. The force of the rheme of the STATEMENT is t h u s reinforced
and made even more prominently negative.
Eddie's negative and angry emotion is triggered when indicated by the
vulgar EXCLAMATIONS with f-words in line 19 and 20. The negative
intimacy of the speech act in line 19, That's it...Fuck!!!, is again intensified
paralinguistically by the non-verbal act.

19 Eddie: That's it, motherfucker! That's it...Fuck!!! (throws a towel in Henry's face)

Low Degree ._» High Degree

20 Eddie: Fuck you! Get away from that tap! Puck you! Get away from that tap!

Low Degree . High Degree

During the second fistfight emotionality is also expressed by the

grunts of the participants. Eddie utters more words this time. However, he is

59
 beaten in the end. The expression of his fear is marked in the following
emotional utterance:

24 Eddie: You usually fall by now, sucker. What's What's hold y o u up, sucker? Usually fall by now.
holding you up?

Low Degree •_» High Degree

It is evident here t h a t the succession of the two speech acts in the

screenplay (STATEMENT, INQUIRY) is reversed in the soundtrack (INQUIRY,
STATEMENT when the STATEMENT Usually Jail by now used after t h e
INQUIRY What's hold you up, sucker? From the point of view of pragmatic
meaning this changes the core of the information. In the soundtrack, the
mocking STATEMENT comes first and becomes intensified by the derogatory
form of the address sucker. Then the less intensified STATEMENT omits the
subject you. The form of STATEMENT is the first sign of fear in Eddie's
utterances.
However, a strong disrespect toward Henry is present in Eddie's last
utterance before he is beaten.

26 Eddie: Okay, what? What's "okay"? You fucking What's "okay," y o u fuckin' rummy? What's okay?
rummy, what's okay?

Low Degree ._» High Degree

The comparison shows omission of the first speech act of INQUIRY

Okay, what? in the film soundtrack of the dialogue. The screenplay's version
of the utterance is highly elliptical; nevertheless, it is made even shorter in
the soundtrack.
The four lines uttered during the fight are again emphatic and
exclamatory, expressing attitudes. For the film discourse it is relevant t h a t
the Eddie's line 2 3 in the screenplay, "You fight like a girl" [Bukowski 1987.
43] is omitted in the soundtrack. In my opinion, the reason for this omission
is that the degree of emotionality, informality, expressiveness, masculinity
and negative intimacy should be reduced.

60
 3.5. Preconclusion

Chapter Three h a s been devoted to a tentative pragmatic

interpretation of the film dialogue. In the beginning, general characteristics
and functions of film dialogue were introduced. Subsequently, the s p e e c h
events occurring in the film dialogue in Barfly were analyzed.
First, two potential layers of setting were identified. It h a s been shown,
that the level of the audio-film setting, with the significant audio-visual
narrator, is intertwined with the level of the social setting of the speech
events (fistfight, b a r talk leading to fistfight) in the film dialogue. The aspect
of the Hollywood film setting a n d the aspect of a low life b a r setting h a s been
discovered a n d described.
Secondly, the context of the speech situation h a s been revealed by
discussing the characteristic features of the two on-screen participants in
the interaction. The viewer h a s been identified as the third potential
participant of the film dialogue, and the "horizon of expectation" significance
was mentioned.
Furthermore, the ends of the interaction have been identified. In
relation to both of the characters the explicit m u t u a l goal to offend a n d
humiliate the other was mentioned. However, the motivations of Eddie and
Henry are different, since the first wants to show his masculinity and
dominance a n d the later w a n t s to survive by having a drink. In relation to
the audience, the goal of the interaction employs distinctive film dialogue
functions. More precisely, the function of controlling of the viewer's
evaluation and emotion a n d the function of character revelation have been
mentioned in connection with the goals of the interaction.
In the section analyzing the actual speech acts, the shifts in meaning
have been discovered through a comparison of the screenplay a n d
soundtrack versions of the film dialogue. The skilful employment of added
exclamations a n d the intricate u s e of the degree of negative intimacy in the

61
soundtrack version have been observed in the course of the film dialogue. It
h a s been manifested t h a t t h e degree of negativity in most cases is expanded
in the s o u n d t r a c k version in comparison with the screenplay. However, one
speech act indicating a positive emotion or one case of a lower degree of
negative intimacy h a s been found in Henry's contributions in the soundtrack
as opposed to the screenplay. The viewer's possible positive interpretation of
Henry's negative intimacy h a s been mentioned in opposition with the clearly
negative interpretation of t h e intimate verbal behaviour of Eddie.
Furthermore, the ongoing process of REDUCTION, making the utterances
more direct, and more informal as well as more elliptical in the soundtrack
h a s been followed in the comparative analysis.

62
 CHAPTER FOUR
Conclusion

Film is a synthetic art form and the employment of dialogue in film is a

highly complex matter. The limited scope of this thesis prevented me from
further analysis of the film dialogue in Barfly. Nevertheless, the basic
outlines of the film dialogue discourse or style have been analysed.
To summarize the results of the analysis, I will first present
observations t h a t have been made in the discourse analysis of the two
sequences of the film dialogue in Barfly. Subsequently, I will try to
contextualize the observed phenomena and highlight the interrelationships
between them.
In Chapter One, the social context of the speech behaviour in the two
sequences of the film dialogue is described, analyzed and interpreted. The
four dimensions of analysis are used to describe the social context of the
dialogue, namely the social context of the low life bar "Golden Horn," and the
immediate context of utterance, the situation within which the verbal
interaction is conducted (fistfight, b a r talk) .
The verbal interaction between Henry and Eddie h a s been found
highly intimate on the solidarity scale. The intimacy is found to be mostly
negative, as an atmosphere of conflict is present. The participants u s e their
slightly different positions to show their dominance and superiority to each
other. S t a t u s is used to offend a n d / o r humiliate the other participant.
Furthermore, a n extremely high degree of informality h a s been discovered
in the contributions. The interlocutors u s e informal speech forms (slang,
non-standard language, obscene and derogatory expressions) for the
purpose of degrading each other's position. Eddie's social s t a t u s seems to be
higher as he is the bartender and Henry is "a mere alcoholic." However, the
implicit meanings suggest that Eddie's superiority is only p r e s u m p t u o u s . As

63
far as the affective a n d referential functions of the verbal exchanges are
concerned, it h a s been evident t h a t emotionality of the utterances prevails
over factuality.
In Chapter Two, a close formal comparison of the screenplay and
soundtrack version of the two sequence of the film dialogue h a s been carried
out. It h a s led u s to following conclusions:
First, on the phonetic level, it h a s become evident that even though the
language in the screenplay reflects a high degree of informality of the
expressions by t h e two men, on m a n y occasions the actual spoken dialogue
in the film is changed slightly in order to expand the degree of informality
of the language a n d the casual tone of the interaction. Furthermore, the
poetic function of language used (more by Henry) h a s been disclosed in the
use of alliteration and sound condensation. T h u s the communication is
backgrounded a n d the sound structure of words, i.e. the act of speaking as
such, is foregrounded.
Secondly, on the morphosyntactic level, it h a s been shown t h a t
contracted forms, subjective word order, substitution and REDUCED
constructions in the film dialogue are at work to make the verbal acts more
colloquial, more direct as well as more intimate. The soundtrack version of
the interaction shows a higher frequency of s u c h strategies and is t h u s in
many cases slightly more informal and intensified t h a n the screenplay
version. In this section, the notion of ellipsis is discussed while views of
Leech, Crystal a n d Fowler are combined in the interpretation.
Chapter Three is completed with its own summary in Preconclusion
above. However, it needs to be pointed out t h a t the interpretation of the
pragmatic meaning employed in two different layers of setting h a s led u s to
the specification of the film discourse a n d style of the dialogue.
The specific features of t h e film dialogue stemming from the
screenplay-soundtrack comparison are:

64
 1) The film soundtrack dialogue p u t s a higher emphasis on emotionality
(higher frequency of exclamations), informality, expressiveness,
masculinity a n d negativity of utterances. Use of expressions with more
positive meanings have been identified only in Henry's contributions,
which is done on purpose to anchor the character a n d the diegesis of
the film a n d to reveal the character.
2) The dialogue is more colloquial using reduced constructions,
contracted forms, omissions, ellipsis, elision, slang expressions and
subjective word order frequently as mentioned above.
3) The paralinguistic level of utterance is emphasized by the presence of
the audio-visual film narrator; the camera work, mise-en-scěne and
editing. This type of narrator contextualizes the spoken dialogue of the
characters and even renders the characters' emotions, while the verbal
exchange between interlocutors is designed purposefully for the
overhearing spectator. The channel of the interaction can be described
as two on-screen characters communicating information to the
audience by performing a film dialogue.

The work of the camera is simultaneously significant in delivering the

speech acts. The camera 1 0 really does "speak" by organizing the on-screen
image within which the film dialogue takes place. Henry's victorious a n d
relieved gesture during the exclamation Hey baby, his empty palm "speech
act" and his sniffing have been mentioned. These gestures all intensify the
illocutionary force of the utterances they accompany. In similar way, Eddie's
directive statement is made even more directive by the non-verbal act of
throwing a cigarette into Henry's beer. Thus, the ways the actors deliver the
words, their expressions and tones of utterances, are more significant since
they can be seen a n d heard on the screen, photographed by the camera.
Besides, the work of camera changes the meaning of the dialogue by making

10
The experienced, avowed and recognized director of photography, Robby Muller, was
behind the camera of Barfly. He h a s photographed films directed by Wim Wenders since the
1970s, films by J i m J a r m u s h since the 1980s, and films by Lars von Trier since the 1990s.

65
Henry's character the more prominent speech participant. The actual,
shabby setting of the b a r is revealed also through the camera. Last b u t not
least, audio-visual n a r r a t o r is used for keeping the viewer in s u s p e n s e .

4) Another specific feature of the discourse is the phatic function; mere

establishing of social contacts is missing in the characters' interaction.
Moreover, the speakers tend not to tell each other what the other
already knows. The film dialogue, working on double layers, is
constructed for the viewers' benefit while the words are more directed at
t h e m t h a n at the on-screen characters.

It h a s been proved that words of the film dialogue serve a double duty.
The film dialogue is stylized purposefully serving the functions mentioned
with Kozloff. Characters' gestures and tones of utterances are used by the
audiovisual narrator; the work of camera, mise-en-scěne and editing, to
create the film dialogue meaning. In my opinion, the phatic function of the
dialogue is suppressed exactly because of the double duty of the interaction
as well as because of the simultaneous significance of the work of camera.
The wording of the dialogue leaves out the components which don't serve the
bifurcated function of the film dialogue. Establishing social contact by verbal
interaction in Barfly is left out.
[See Kozloff, 18-19]

The above observations have been shown transparently in the example

of the "dialogic" monologue of Henry as well. Writing about dialogic speech
Mukaŕovský a d d s the term dialogic quality which he defines as "designating
a potential tendency toward the alternation of two or more semantic
contextures, a tendency which is manifested not only in dialogue b u t also in
monologue" [Mukaŕovský 1977.109]. In the monologue uttered by Henry in
his room, I have identified the multilayered voice employment. Henry, as if
he were speaking to himself, indirectly addresses the people and the

66
audience. The double-layered n a t u r e of the words used in the film dialogue
mentioned above, can t h u s be expanded to multilayered employment of
voices in the film dialogue. S u c h conclusions would lead u s to Bakhtin's
notion of heteroglosia. Every utterance reflects two voices or even more. For
example, in the above mentioned monologue of Henry, the voices are the
following:

1. The indirect voice of Bukowski, as the a u t h o r of the text

2. The direct voice of Henry Chinaski embodying young Charles
Bukowski
3. The direct voice of Rourke, the impersonator of Henry
4. The voice of the filmmakers (director, producer, director of
photography, etc.)
5. The voice of the ever present "overhearing" spectator
6. The voice of the audio-visual film narrator

Moreover, the shape a n d u s e of the verbal interaction reflects the

specific film dialogue functions. It anchors the diegesis and characters. It
reveals the characters to the audience a n d control the viewers' evaluation
and emotions. In linguistic terms, the style of the utterance in the film
dialogue u n d e r analysis can be defined as extensively emotional, brief, direct,
informal and negatively intimate as stated above; t h u s my hypothesis that
the language in the film soundtrack h a s been changed for the film narration
purposes h a s been proved. The hypothesis h a s also verified t h a t the film
dialogue in Barfly is highly a n d purposefully stylized despite of striving to
imitate authentic, natural conversation.
On a yet more general level, it can be said t h a t the style of the film
dialogue in Barfly, even if stylized according to the conventional norms of
Hollywood film representation of reality, is a rare example of authentic
representation of low life in Los Angeles.

67
 APPENDIX

I. DESCRIPTION OF CHARACTERS
HENRY CHINASKI: Late twenties. Already life-worn. More weary t h a n angry.
Face formed by the streets, poverty. If he is mad, then it is the m a d n e s s of
the disowned who lack interest in the s t a n d a r d way of life. Rather t h a n
enter the treadmill of society he h a s chosen the bottle and the bars. There
seems little for him to do b u t sit and wait, b u t he is not sure what the
waiting means. Drinking seems a way to hide. He fears the life of the dull
and the damned, and the eight-hour jobs they hate yet m u s t fight to keep.
He thinks of suicide; he h a s tried suicide several times and failed, b u t
he's not even a good suicide. He is more s a d t h a n bitter, and like most
desperate men he h a s some humor. He attempts to remain hidden behind
his street face b u t now and then kindness and gentleness come to surface,
though rarely.
He moves slowly for a young man, rather stiff-shouldered, b u t at times
his movements show a sudden swiftness a n d grace. It is as if he were saving
himself for some magic moment, some magic time. Meanwhile, he drinks and
drinks and drinks.

EDDIE, THE NIGHT BARTENDER: Twenty-four. Stocky, square-jawed,

quick with word, seems to know things b u t does not. He's good with ladies,
knows the p h r a s e s to set them off, pours free drinks to the best lookers. He's
also a man's m a n , black hair jutting from his chest, his shirt open two or
three buttons down. He's really a sickening prick b u t you don't want to
admit it to anybody because he's what a m a n is supposed to be, and if you
don't like that, you know, then there's something wrong with you.
One of his favorite s t u n t s is to do gymnastic tricks along the bar,
grabbing the edge of the bar with one h a n d and putting the other h a n d upon
a stack of beer cases, then swinging his legs high into the air while grinning
like a motherfucking monkey. He is a good duker, he p u n c h e s hard a n d on
target b u t he is only a front r u n n e r - if he can't do his m a n in early he tires,
loses heart, and if you catch him with one while h e is coming in he blinks,
backs off, looks s t u n n e d and you can see the fear in his eyes.
Eddie's mind is on women, he lives more to fuck t h a n to drink, and
fucking to him is not so m u c h a joy as it is something he h a s to do to prove
something to himself, a n d he m u s t prove this something continually b u t he
never asks himself why. J u s t another hustling bartender stamping around
on the boards.
[Bukowski 1987.7-9]

68
 II. SCALES OF NEGATIVE INTIMACY*

SCENE ONE
Eddie: All ya gotta do is beg for a little mercy, All ya gotta do is beg for a little mercy.
/off-screen/ /off-screen/

Low Degree High Degree

Henry: Quitting to you would be like swallowing Quitting to you would be like swallowing piss for
piss for eternity. eternity.

Low Degree High Degree

Eddie: Come on, give it up! Now instead of later! Come on, give it up!
/off-screen/

Low Degree «. High Degree

Henry: You're going to need the priest, prick. And You gonna need the priest, y o u prick. And when
while your mother's crying at the funeral I'm going your mother's crying at the funeral I'm gonna goose
to goose her with a turkey neck! her with a turkey neck! ...HEY, BABY...

Low Degree _» High Degree

Henry: Shit...that the b e s t you can do? You better Oh, shit...oh, hey, that the best y o u can do? You
phone for help. better phone for help.

Low Degree High Degree

S Eddie: Scumbag! Faggot!

Low Degree _» High Degree

SCENE TWO
8 Henry: Hey, boy! Fetch me a draft! Hey boy, fetch me a draft!

Low Degree «. High Degree

9 Henry: Hey, you! You in that filthy apron! Hey, you! You in that filthy apron!

Low Degree High Degree

69
10 Eddie: Seems like all those M u h a m a d Alis I've I hear a voice down there but I'm sure I don't see
laid on you have rattled your bells. m u c h . It s e e m s like that beating I gave y o u last
night must've rattled your bells, h u h ?

Low Degree High Degree

fl | Henry: Look, barkeep, I remember ordering a Remember ordering a draft, barkeep. What, you out
draft. You out of brew or h a s your lobotomy brew or has lobotomy finally taken hold, h u h ?
finally taken hold?

Low Degree High Degree

12 Eddie: Eddie: I'll drive you right through the I'll drive your head right through t h e fucking wall
fucking wall tonight, fag. I pulled my p u n c h e s on tonight, y o u faggot. I pulled m y p u n c h e s on you
you last night... last night...
But don't move!

Low Degree . » High Degree

13 Eddie: What the hell are you on tonight, p u n k ? Fuck y o u on tonight?

Low Degree _. » High Degree

14 Henry: You're looking at a new m a n , my boy. I've Lookin' at a new man, m y boy. I g o t t a a full tank of
got a full t a n k of fuel. fuel.

Low Degree High Degree

L5 Eddie: You pay me for that goddamned beer! You gotta pay for that goddamned beer, (throws a
burning cigarette into the glass of beer Henry is
holding)
Low Degree . » High Degree

L6 Henry: Eddie, come closer. I want to tell you Oh, Eddie, c o m e close. I wanna tell y o u something.
something and I w a n t you hear it good... Come here, I want y o u hear it good...

Low Degree . » High Degree

17 Eddie: Yeah? Yeah, or what?

Low Degree .» High Degree

18 Henry: Your mother's c u n t stinks like carpet Your mother's cunt stinks like (sniffs) carpet
cleaner. cleaner.

Low Degree . » High Degree

19 Eddie: That's it, motherfucker! That's it...Fuck!!! (throws a towel in Henry's face)

Low Degree High Degree

70
20 Eddie: Fuck you! Get away from t h a t tap! Fuck you! Get away from that tap!

Low Degree High Degree

21 Eddie: Your whole life is j u s t a b u n c h of cant's. Your life is just a bunch of cant's. You can't work.
You can't work, you can't fuck. You can't fight. y o u can't fuck. You can't fight.

Low Degree High Degree

22 I Eddie: I'd hate to be you if I were me. I'd hate to be you if I were me.

Low Degree High Degree

24 Eddie: You usually fall by now, sucker. What's What's hold y o u up, sucker? Usually fall by now.
holding you up?

Low Degree .» High Degree

25 Henry: Okay, Eddie... Okay, Eddie...

Low Degree High Degree

26 Eddie: Okay, what? What's "okay"? You fucking What's "okay," y o u fuckin' rummy? What's okay?
rummy, what's okay?

Low Degree _» High Degree

Legend to the scales:

s t a n d s for the degree of negative intimacy in the screenplay
« s t a n d s for the degree of negative intimacy in the soundtrack when it is reduced
» s t a n d s for the degree of negative intimacy in the soundtrack when it is extended

71
 III. SOME SLANG EXPRESSIONS

faggot n A sexual pervert. Some cl930 use. Archaic, having been replaced by the
shorter "fag." See fag.

fag 2. n A homosexual; an effeminate man; since c 1940 specif., a male

homosexual/ 1941: "He had the body of a wrestler a n d a face of a fag."
adj. Homosexual; pertaining to homosexuals.

g o o s e v.t. 1 [taboo] Lit. and fig., to poke or threaten to poke a finger into someone's
a n u s to produce shock or annoyance, either to m a k e a joke or to start the person working or
the like. 1943: "As she was bending over her work-table, a playful lab assistant goosed her."
M. Shulman, Barefoot Boy with Cheek, 99.
2 To outwit someone, to take advantage of another's lack of alertness. cl930
3 To start a motor or a machine; to feed s p u r s of gasoline or power to a motor.
C1935.
4 To threaten, beg, cajole, or encourage another to do something faster or
better.
5 To stop a locomotive suddenly, u s u . by putting it into reverse while it is
moving forward. Railroad usw

6 Fig., to obtain the maximum speed from a n engine, machine, or esp. a

vehicle.

p t U l k n. 1 A petty hoodlum; one who thinks he w a n t s to be a hoodlum b u t lacks real

toughness and experience. 1949: "All the cockiness which association with Frankie had lent
him, and Fankie's absence had taken away, returned. Dealer was coming home. 'Guys who
think they can rough me up, they wake u p wit' the cats lookin' at 'em,' he immediately
began warning everyone. And spat to emphasize j u s t how tough a Division Street p u n k
could get." N. Algren, Man with the Golden Arm, 11.
2 A young or inexperienced person. Specif, a boy tramp or child hobo; a boy,
youth, or beginner; a young prisoner; any C.C.C boy, except an official leader; a child or
adolescent of either sex; a youngster.
3 An inferior or unimportant person. Specif. A small-time criminal. 1930: "...
They reached the stage where they thought only ' p u n k s ' committed misdemeanours. ..."
Levine, Third Degree, 102.
4 [derog.] A catamite; the young male companion of a sodomite. Prison,
maritime, and tramp use.
5 An inferior prize fighter, jockey, pool player, etc.
6 A lackey; esp. a waiter or porter.
7 A m a n or guy; esp. a worthless man; a petty criminal. 1934: "We're j u s t two
punks, Frank." Cain, Postman, 88.

rummy or rummie n.
1 A drunkard. 1860: DAE. 1941: "What rummies they were getting to be."
Cain, Peirce, 55. Colloq.
2 A stupid, shiftless, or confused person, as if from habitual drunkenness; a
worthless person, a s a drunk. 1937: "And besides, t h a t rule was only for rummies."
Weidman, Wholesale, 68. Not common.

72
 3 Anything inferior or worthless. Not common.

s c u m b a g n. A person regarded as despicable, [http://dictionary.reference.com]

l.[ 1920s] a derogatory name for someone you don't like

s u c k e r n.1 A person easily deceived or cheated; an easy victim; a dupe.

2 A fan; one who is vulnerable to a certain type of person, business deal, sport,
or gambling game. 1953: I'm a sucker for a beautiful blonde." George Sanders [movie actor],
AP interview.
3 A teacher's pet. Student use.
4 A lollipop. Child use; colloq.

DICTI0NARY.COM:

Slang.

a. An unspecified thing. Used as a generalized term of reference, often as an

intensive: "our goal of getting that sucker on the air before old age took the
both of us" (Linda Ellerbee).
b. A person. Used as a generalized term of reference, often as an intensive: He's a
mean sucker.

[See Dictionary of American Slang 1975 and http://dictionary.reference.com]

73
 IV. IMAGES FROM THE MOVIE BARFLY

Line 2: Quitting to you would be like swallowing piss for eternity.

Line 4: ...HEY, BABY...

74
 Line 6: Scumbag! Faggot!

Line 9: Hey, you! You in that filthy apron!

75
Henry's palm with no money Cigarette in beer

Line 18: Your mother's cunt stinks like (sniffs) carpet cleaner.

76
The towel in Henry's face Drinking from a tap

Line 25: Okay, Eddie...

11
 BIBLIOGRAPHY:
—: Dictionary of American Slang; ed. Harold Wentworth a n d Stuart Berg
Flexner, Fitzhenrz & Whiteside Limited, Toronto: 1975.

—: Dictionary.com; h t t p : / /dictionary.reference.com

B l l k o w s k i , C h a r l e s : The Movie: "Barfly"; Black Sparrow Press, S a n t a

Rosa: 1987.

Bo rdwell, David & Kristin Thompson Film Art: An introduction.

Alfred A. Knopf, New York: 1986.

C r y s t a l , D a v i d : A Dictionary of Linguistics and Phonetics; Basil Blackwell

Ltd, Oxford and New York: 1985.

D e n z i n , N o r m a n K.: Hollywood Shot by Shot: Alcoholism in American

Cinema; Aldine de Gruyter, New York: 1991. In Review by Alexander Hicks,
The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 97, No. 6 (May, 1992), 1788-1790.
http: / /links.istor.org/sici=0002-
9602%28199205%2997%3A6%3C1788%3AHSBSAI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-3

E b e r t , R o g e r : "A Review of Barfly"; In Chicago Sun-Times, Chicago: 1987.

http://www.suntimes.com/ebert/ebert reviews/1987/12/269356.html.

F o w l e r , R o g e r : Linguistic Criticism; Oxford University Press, New York:

1996.

H o l m e s , J a n e t : An Introduction to Sociolinguistics; Longman, Wellington:

2000.

K o z l o f f , S a r a h : Overhearing Film Dialogue; University of California Press,

Los Angeles: 2000.

L e e c h , G e o f f r e y : Semantics; Penguin Books Ltd, Baltimore: 1974.

M u k a ř o v s k ý , J a n : The Word and Verbal Act, Yale University, New Haven

and London: 1977.

T h o m a s , J e n n y : Meaning in Interaction: an Introduction to Pragmatics;

Longman, London a n d New York: 1995.

78