See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/380034699

Mikhail Bakhtin's Dialogism in William Shakespeare's King Lear and Macbeth

Article · April 2024

CITATIONS READS
0 108

2 authors, including:

Kuriakose Varkey
UNIVERSITY OF ENGINEERING & MANAGEMENT
4 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Kuriakose Varkey on 24 April 2024.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Indian Journal of Natural Sciences www.tnsroindia.org.in ©IJONS

Vol.14 / Issue 82 / Feb / 2024 International Bimonthly (Print) – Open Access ISSN: 0976 – 0997
RESEARCH ARTICLE

Mikhail Bakhtin’s Dialogism in William Shakespeare’s King Lear and

Macbeth

Kuriakose Varkey1* and Parul Mishra2

1Research Scholar, Department of English, Amity University, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India.

2Professor, Department of English, Amity University, Jaipur, Rajasthan, India.

Received: 04 Sep 2023 Revised: 10 Dec 2023 Accepted: 30 Jan 2024

*Address for Correspondence

Kuriakose Varkey
Research Scholar,
Department of English,
Amity University,
Jaipur, Rajasthan, India.
Email: kvkose@gmail.com

This is an Open Access Journal / article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License
(CC BY-NC-ND 3.0) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the
original work is properly cited. All rights reserved.

ABSTRACT

Mikhail Bakhtin is famous for his dialogism. In his dialogic theory, Bakht in has explained many parts
covering language polyphony, heteroglossia, and carnivalesque. Moreover, postmodern research also
focuses on dialogism in texts written in the past. The research paper endeavorsto delve deep into the
tragic theories and pull out the dialogic concept of Bakhtinin Shakespearian plays especially King Lear
and Macbeth. The term ‘Dialogism’ comes from dialogue which is an integral part of plays. Bakht in in his
theory of dialogism hasside-stepped the use and implication of dialogism in drama. In fact,dialogism is the
grounding element of drama but Bakhtin unfortunately inhabited its significance only in novels. Itis a bid
to explain the use of Dialogismin various Shakespearian plays. The paper explores the meaning of
dialogism and the use of the idea in different tones, either in verbal or written. In dialogic culture, the
emphasis is placed on individual traits at play within between cultural groups. Bakhtin opines every
dialogue human possesses the capacity to resist, confront and make personal meanings out of change.
The paper deduces the fact that dialogic interpretation has extensive scope apart from novels.

Keywords: Dialogism, Polyphony, Heteroglossia, carnivalesque, confront.

1
Indian Journal of Natural Sciences www.tnsroindia.org.in ©IJONS

Vol.14 / Issue 82 / Feb / 2024 International Bimonthly (Print) – Open Access ISSN: 0976 – 0997
Kuriakose Varkey and Parul Mishra

INTRODUCTION
et al.,

Dialogism is used in many literary works of Mikhail Bakhtin. The particular study focuses on how William
Shakespeare’s *7+ plays are the abundant warehouses of the concept of dialogism. Graham Peachey *6+ says, ‚Mikhail
Bakhtin is one of the most influential theorists of philosophy as well as literary studies. His work on dialogue and
discourse has changed the way in which we read texts – both literary and cultural – and his practice of philosophy in
literary refraction and philological exploration has made him a pioneering figure in the twentieth-century
convergence of the two disciplines‛(Taylor & Francis). Bakhtin was born in Oryol, Russia in 1895. His works inspired
many writers in the field of philosophy, sociology, anthropology, psychology, linguistics, and many other
disciplines. He was associated with Russian Formalism, a school of literary criticism that emphasized the functional
role of literary devices. Bakhtin’s theories were unknown to Western literary scholars. He became famous
posthumously. Bakhtin’s earlier works stressed ethics and aesthetics. His notion was that a literary work was a
crafted idea and the unity of a technical implement. A literary theory that analysis of various levels of
communication between works of literature and other authors. In his 1984 study, ‘Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics’,
Bakhtin states that life expands from one mass to another and one context to another, one social context to another,
and from one generation to another. The world is a bridge between myself and another.

Just as structura lists, Bakhtin’s ideas can be said to have sprung from the Russian formalist movement by sharing
an interest in the methods of narrative and literary styles (189- 190). But where the formalists’ scientific and historical
outlook led them to exclusively focus on the technicalities, and the methods of mystification, of texts, Bakhtin, much
like the New Historicists, also acknowledged the social and ideological dimension of language (90). Thus, for
Bakhtin, Holquist *4+ says, ‚words in literature are not part of the impersonal code of language but as discourse
directly dependent on ‚particular subjects in specific situations‛(68). Consequently, literature is a form of
communication rather than an independent object, as it, like other types of expressions, depends on the
sociohistorical context ‚at work when the text is produced and when it is consumed‛(68-69). The situation that
operates the meaning of utterances in literary texts, Bakhtin calls it as heteroglossia; It is a situation in which the
subject is ‚surrounded by the myriad responses he or she might make at any point, but any of which must be framed
in a specific discourse selected from the teeming thousands available‛ (69). Moreover, what can be seen as central to
idea of heteroglossia is the notion that the meaning of a word just uttered will be dependent on the circumstantial
and unstable conditions of that specific time and place (70). Taghizadeh and Faizi *8+ quote in his research, ‚The fact
that it is nearly impossible to decipher all the details that might influence the meaning of dialogues in plays such as
Hamlet, for example tone of voice and subtle body language, gives further emphasis to the Bakhtinian notion of
literature as essentially finalize – that is, constantly developing, out of reach for any one-sided interpretation (110).

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

To letter this research paper, the Qualitative Approach of research is followed, wherein the primary sources of
selected texts by William Shakespeare like Macbeth, King Lear, and more plays have been analyzed and studied to
extract the use of dialogism. To further validate the resources secured by the critical study of various papers written
on similar topics.

Dialogism
The word ‘Dialogism’ extracted from ‘dialogue and Bakhtin compared monologue with dialogue. Many poets like
Jonh Donne and Robert Browning are the masters of monologue. Browing’s ‘My last Duchess and Porphyria’s Lover
are more fascinating works. Bakhtin believe if a person has something in his mind, it is monologue. It was certain
that Bakhtin’s deep awareness about social, cultural relations and knew language is the only way to express his
themes. He puts forward this theory in his ‚Problems of Dostoevsky’s poetics‛. In dialogism, there is always a room
for debate since inquiry is approached ontological emphasizing point of view rather than truth. (67) According to

2
Indian Journal of Natural Sciences www.tnsroindia.org.in ©IJONS

Vol.14 / Issue 82 / Feb / 2024 International Bimonthly (Print) – Open Access ISSN: 0976 – 0997

Kuriakose Varkey and Parul Mishra

Bakhtin, every human possesses the capacity to resist, confront and make personal meanings out of social change. In
et al.,
dialogism, emphasis is placed on individual personalities at play within and between cultural groups (Bakhtin 1985)
rather than seeking consequences as a necessary outcome of Dialogism of Bakhtin. Postmodern writers believe
poetry is monologic, it has no social connections. In prose, words are dialogical, there is an engagement of different
characters, views, voices and world views. Dialogues are generally double-voiced, ironic, parodies or words used in
quotations. Double words contain two meanings, one literal and monologic meaning.

Heteroglossia
A dialogue contains conventions, discussions, and views. Bakhtin used the term ’heteroglossia’. which is the use of
multiple variations of language and ideas within the language. People use words differently; the same words are
used in different circumstances differently. As the speaker is a social person, speaks the same matter, and when he
speaks to children, wives, parents, and friends, there is a variation of expression. A village inhabitant expresses his
notions using local dialects that might not be the language of a city dweller even though the idea must be similar.
Only the way of expression is different. Shakespearian dialects are not commonly used in England. In all his texts, a
different kind of diction is casted-off. Heteroglossia is well established in Virginia Woolf’s ‘Mrs. Dalloway’, Clarissa
Dalloway is the female protagonist and a fictional high-class society lady in the English post-world war. Mrs. Dolla
way said she would buy the flowers herself; it seems a very trivial act. But the single line provokes the readers to
keep the multiple thought. Readers of various sections of society imbibe it differently.

Polyphony-it is related to music composition in which more than one melodious lineis sung simultaneously in a
harmonic way refers to the polarity of independent unmeshed voices or consciousness, different word views but
interact with each other they don’t change their worldview, they remain independent. We as readers, while reading
feel that it is not written by a single author but rather too many characters. Bakhtin says Tolstoy’s works are
monologic. All characters have their dialogue but they merge in the authors’ view it becomes monologic.
Dostoevsky’s characters are not objective but plural. If the voices of the characters are merged the voices of the
author, it does not become dialogic but the polyphonic

Carnivalesque This term is developed from the carnival. In the medieval period, during the time of Christmas,
common people used to drink, enjoy and have merriment, sex, sing and dance and have fun free, a kind of
democratic culture, social hierarchy was free, people of different culture engaged in different activities irrespective of
their social status. People of opposite nature tried to interact with each other. The word ’carnival’ in literature refers
to the movement in literature or literature as whole when such types of situations are oriented. Shakespeare is
‚Carnivalesque‛ than polyphonic. One may, however, think otherwise, and Knowles (1998:11) and also believes that
‚The oddest thing of all is that is the opposite seems self-evident‛. ‚Here hung lips that I have kissed I know not how
oft‛-HamletAct5(seen1 -175), the grave digger sees one skull (grave digger’s scene), the gravedigger is indifferent to
that but Hamlet identifies that the skull is the skull of York He found it meaningless whether it was the skull of
Julius Caesar, Alexander, or a beggar, all are meaningless.

The social hierarchy has no meaning. Death is the great equalizer; Prince Hamlet realizes it. This moment can be
termed as carnivalesque in drama. Bakhtin argues that carnivalization reached its highest peak in Farva Revile and
Theodore Dostoevsky. His characters line in a border of its opposites, they have opposite world views and contrast
in their views but they interact with each other, they compete with each other and some of his characters are low and
some are high, and some are lofty and some are destructive, but they compete with each other, they do not change
their world views but they try to understand each other and came to a consensus. Dostoevsky does not come to a
finalization of his character’s consensus because he realizes it has to be put for the future. He possessed a negative
capability. Bakhtin traduces the term ‘Heteroglossia’ to mention the plurality of independent, autonomous, merged
voices in literary texts, be it novel, drama or any other narrative texts. Dialogic criticism refers to as type of criticism
which is based on the unique concepts introduced by Bakhtin in his literary studies.

3
Indian Journal of Natural Sciences www.tnsroindia.org.in ©IJONS

Vol.14 / Issue 82 / Feb / 2024 International Bimonthly (Print) – Open Access ISSN: 0976 – 0997

Kuriakose Varkey and Parul Mishra

William Shakespeare
et al.,
Ben Johnson *5+ calls Shakespeare, ‚not of an age but for all time‛. Shakespeare, the dramatist of all time, seasons
that world has ever produced. He is mostly quoted immediately after the Bible. His works have been produced in
almost all the languages. Shakespearian plays are modified in many languages. His characters have social realities
rather than theatrical realities, characters like Julius Caesar, Hamlet, King Lear, Othello, Macbeth, Shlock and many.
At the early stages of his career, Shakespeare himself was an actor, and be loyal to the Queen Elezabeth and wanted
get the patronage from the queen. In his life time, Shakespeare, had seen the age of Elizabeth and Jacobean. In 1585,
he started his career and opened a drama company named ‘Lord Chamberline’s man’ and this company was known
as Kings Man. Up to 1613, he extended his writings and at the age of 49, he took retirement from writing.The years in
between 1585 and 1592 have been called ‚the lost years‛ as there was no record of his life was not known to the
world. At the outset, Shakespeare wrote comedies and then historical plays and tragedies. At the last stage of his
writings, Shakespeare wrote romantic plays. Shakespeare never wrote anything for become famous but for money.
There were two actor friends, John Hemmings and Henry Condell in his drama company, and they published his
first folio in 1623. And the preface of these first two folios were written by Ben Johnson. In 1603, queen Elizebeth died
and King JamesI came in to the throne and he gave the Royal Patent to Shakespeare’s company and the name became
King’s Man. In 1599, Shakespeare opened a theatre named Globe Theatre in partnership. This theatre was opened for
all classes, neglecting the social status. He wanted his plays should be attracted to all classes. By then, Shakespeare
became rich and bought lot of properties in London and his birthplace Stort ford. In1610, Shakespeare retired form
his public life as an early age. It was the time of plague in London it might be the reason for the early retirement form
the public life, not from writing. But he wrote in collaboration with John Fletcher. In 1613 he completed his writings,
and he spent his remaining life in his native village Stratford-up on Avon and in April,1616, he took his last breath
and buried in his nearby country churchyard. It was written on his tomb, ‚Good friend for Jesus’ sake forebear. To
dig the dust enclosed here. Blessed be the man that spares these stones. And cursed be he that moves my stones‛.
Shakespeare always wrote on fashion prevailed in the market. His best works were written in Jacobean Age
nevertheless he was known as an Elizabethan playwright.

Shakespearean Plays
Shakespearian plays are unmatchable, which are classified as comedies, historical plays, tragedies and
tragicomedies. There are 37 plays altogether. Shakespearian plays were written mainly in Elizabethan and Jacobean
Age. His well-known tragedies are Hamlet, Julius Caser, king Lear, Macbeth, Antony and Cleopatra, Coriolanus,
Othello and many. Shakespearean comedies are sub divided into tragicomedies, romances and problem plays, which
are the dramas have elements of tragedies, humour and complex plots, an important play in this category is ‚All well
that end well‛ and was written in between (1601-1605).And ‚As You Like It‛ is one of the most important comic
plays (1598-1600). Another important problem play is ‚Measure for Measure‛ (1603-1604) Merchant of Venice(1596-
1597), and Mid-Summer Night’s Dream(1595-1596) ‚The Tempest‛ is the tragi- comedy or late romances, written in
the year1611.Historical pays or chronical plays are Henry IV(I), Henry IV(II), and also HenryV, and Henry VI(III),
king John and so on they all belong to the real king of England. Shakespearean tragic characters are generally
isolated ones. They are socially broken down like Hamlet and King Lear. Occurrences are inseparable and
indispensable. The central characters are generally nobles but due to the flaw of the characters lead them to the
drastic end. Most of the historical characters are English monarchs, they glorify and propagate king or queen’s
vitality and courage. Many historians opine that Shakespearian characters are real like beings, and powerful
presentation of images but Dr, Johnson’s view is something different ‚*S+spectators are always in their senses, and
know, from the first act to the last, that the stage is only a stage, and that the players are only players.‛ Shakespeare
extracted plots for his plays from the known areas with good reasons. It was for the situations, To establish Scottish
history he plotted ‘Macbeth‛ and published in the ‘First Folio’ by his friends.

Dialogism in King Lear

Dialogism is the term used specially by Mikhail Bakhtin, the Russian formalist. Bakhtin used this term in his works
‚Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics‛ and ‚Rabelais and His World‛, but do not have the connections with plays.
Bakhtin never talked about dialogism in plays. Writer speaks through characters. When they speak, there is a
4
Indian Journal of Natural Sciences www.tnsroindia.org.in ©IJONS

Vol.14 / Issue 82 / Feb / 2024 International Bimonthly (Print) – Open Access ISSN: 0976 – 0997
Kuriakose Varkey and Parul Mishra

diversification
et al., of meaning. It is not only the character, but the author’s view is there, and justification of the reader,
and the look out of the audience, all are different. The study attempts to establish major implications of dialogism in
King Lear. Michael Gardiner [3] distinguishes dialogism and monologismin two respects. Monologic world is always
gravities itself only and is a referential object. But the dialogic aspect is locked into an intense relationship with the
world the of others. It is having an address towards someone- a listener, an arbitrator or simply anyone. There is
always a chance of response. Dialogue is a passive vehicle of neutrality of information or description. It is designed
to provoke a response and it gives the chance of initiating another dialogue or to initiate a dialogue, it is a coliseum
for the battle between different voices and is charged with hostile, burlesque, appraisal and many more. What
Bakhtin means is that dialogue utterances isas ‘double – voiced’, ‘vari -directional, and ‘multi accented’. (28-29).
Shakespearean plays have instances of dialogism. Many of his plays can be studied in light of the theory of
Dialogism. King Lear addressing the elements in another part of the Heath and The Fool listens the talk. King Lear is
caught in the trouble of dangerous storm, thunder and lightning. He is left with two of his daughters Goneril and
Regan, and the youngest daughter Cordelia is married to the King of France and he became alone and curses himself
about his for his wrong decision to leave Cordelia with bare hands. He was fallen into the craft of the other
daughters and vexed to take the right decision.

Lear:‚Blow, winds, and crack your cheeks! rage! blow!

You cataracts and hurricane, spout
Till you have drench’d our steeples, drown’d the cocks
You sulphurous and thought-executing fires,
Vaunt- couriers of oak-cleaving thunderbolts,
Singe my white head! And thou,all-shaking thunder,
Strike flat the thick rotundity o’th’ world!
Crack Nature’s moulds, all German spill at once
That makes ingrateful man!‛ (Ac. III sc. II 1-10)
King Lear’s incoherent mad words show the pride of a King though he lost his wit.A king can never lose his natural
rights. No natural power can defeat and challenge him. When the king transfers his power and authority to the
daughters, marks the beginning of the downfall his personality.
Lear:‚Nature’s above art in that respect. There’s you
Press- money. That fellow handles his bow like a
Crow- keeper: draw me a cloth’s yard. Look, look!
A mouse, Peace, peace! This piece of toasted cheese
Will don’t. There’s my gauntlet; I’ll prove it on a giant.
(Ac. IV sc. VI 86-91)

King Lear’s character has a marked development. It is treated as the greatest portrayal of the dual character of a hero
in the same play. In the beginning, Lear strikes as haughty, cocky, egoistic, self-centred, conceited, and smug,
buttowards the end, became benign, compassionate, merciful, and reticent. Humility is the striking characteristic of
Lear in Acts IV and V. Misfortune can be the ultimate reason for this behavioural change. It is the redemption of
Lear’s character when he happens to see his youngest daughter as a prisoner with him.
Lear. No, no, no, no! Come, let’s away to prison:
We two alone will sing like bird i’th’ cage:
When thou dost ask me blessing, I’ll kneel down,
And ask of thee forgiveness: so we’ll live,
And pry and sing, tell old tales, and laugh
At glided butterflies, and hear poor rogues
Talk of court news; and we’ll talk with them too,

5
Indian Journal of Natural Sciences www.tnsroindia.org.in ©IJONS

Vol.14 / Issue 82 / Feb / 2024 International Bimonthly (Print) – Open Access ISSN: 0976 – 0997
Kuriakose Varkey and Parul Mishra

Dialogism
et al., in Macbeth
Bost ad [2] said that Drama is more dialogic than any other forms of literature if spite of the unjust view of Bakhtin
towards drama. In drama, author’s view, more confrontation of characters and readers view is established well.
There is ‘polyphony ‘of language and manipulation of ideas arise as the ‘dialogic’ establishment is more prevalent in
drama. Human relations are equipped with conflicts and charges. But not aimed for others. In such interactions,
sounds are signs [which are] in this seen as an open meaning resource; their actual meaning can emerge in situated,
specific social interaction (7), Like any of other Shakespearian plays, ‘Macbeth’ is a warehouse of Bakhtinian concept
of dialogism. Bakhtin supports his peer A.V. Lunacharsky that "Shakespeare is polyphonic to the extreme‛(32) He
writes: ‚Lunacharsky is correct in the sense that certain elements, embryonic rudiments, early buddings of
polyphony can indeed be detected in the dramas of Shakespeare‛ (33). However, this statement is immediately
undermined when he thinks that ‚but to speak of a fully formed and deliberate polyphonic quality in Shakespeare's
drama is in our opinion simply is impossible‛(33) Mikhail Bakhtin’s *1+ dialogism is well established in William
Shakespear’s ‘Macbeth’. Shakespearean plays dramatize human relations, conflict-ridden contexts and provide space
for dialogue as prescribed by Bakhtin. In ‘Macbeth’, William Shakespeare picturised the protagonist Macbeth and his
progression is being like a valiant undefeatable warrior, and then in due course a conspirator and then to a cold-
blooded murderer. But he some time becomes a philosopher in the way of his intellectual dialogues. The greed for
power and witch craft leads his wit to a treacherous dictator and plot the murder of his own King by plotting with
some hired murders. It became a need for him due to not only his inner turmoil but also his excessive greed for
power belief in witches’ phony. Depth of psychology is traced in the ‘scene of dagger and porter’. The scene depicts
the destructive nature and the travel of Macbeth towards the self-entity and psychological blood shed of King
Duncan. Lady Macbeth quotes, ‚Infirm of purpose! Give the daggers‛ (255). The fulfilment of the prophecy turns
Macbeth into covetous and gluttonous and the thought of murdering his own pious king. When the noble, Ross calls
him ‘thane of Cawdor’, Macbeth’s mind yearned for the power of throne but he is sceptic of the prophecy.

Macbeth. Stay, you imperfect speakers, tell me more

By Sinel’s death I know I am Thane of Glaimis;
But how of Cawdor? The Thane of Cawdor lives,
A prosperous gentle man; and to be king
Standsnot within the prospect of belief,
No more than to be Cawdor, Say from whence
You owe this strange intelligence? or why
Up on this blasted health you stop our way
With such prophetic greeting? Speak. I charge you.
(Ac. I sc. III70-78)

Another instance of dialogic eloquence is seen Act IIIof Macbeth. The wicked state of utterance, despite of the
murderer- self of Macbeth expresses the quality of a warrior. The mental state of Macbeth becomes irrational, and
Lady Macbeth tries to sooth him.

Macbeth. We have scotch’ the snake, not kill’d it:

Sh’ll close and be herself, whilst our poor malice
Remains in danger of her former tooth.
But the frame of things disjoints, both the worlds suffer,
Ere we will eat our meal in fear, and sleep
In the affliction of these terrible dreams
That shake us nighty. Better be with the dead,
Whom we, to gain our peace, have sent to peace,
Than on the torture of the mind to lie
In restless ecstasy. Duncan is in his grave;
After life’s fitful fever he sleeps well;
6
Indian Journal of Natural Sciences www.tnsroindia.org.in ©IJONS

Vol.14 / Issue 82 / Feb / 2024 International Bimonthly (Print) – Open Access ISSN: 0976 – 0997
Kuriakose Varkey and Parul Mishra

Treason
et al.,has done his worst: nor steel, poison,
Malice domestic, foreign levy, nothing
Can touch him further:
(Ac. III sc.II 14-27)

In its richness of importance and complexity of dialogism, Macbeth becomes philosophical when he hears about the
death of his wife Lady Macbeth, and thinks about the trifling nature of life. The analogy of life and his greed for
power still makes him more philosophical. Ambition, violence, fate, natural and unnatural incidents, and the
reflection of manhood.

Macbeth. She should have died hereafter.

There would have been a time for such a word.
Tomorrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this pretty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Lif’s is but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more; it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
(Ac.V Sc. V 16-28)

FINDINGS

In the research, it is found that William Shakespeare used dialogism, carnivalesque, heteroglossia, and polyphony in
almost all the plays. Mikhail Bakhtin emphasized these terms in his novels only and never tried to use these terms in
plays. Shakespeare had experimented with all these terms many years before. The characters like Hamlet, Macbeth,
King Lear, and Julies Caesar and their dialogues are real-like figures. The speeches of these characters are addressed
to someone. Shakespearian characters have a perpetual existence away from the writer.

CONCLUSION

The study focuses on Michail Bakhtin’s dialogism in William Shakespeare’s two plays, ‚King Lear and Macbeth.‛
Bakhtin emphasized the theory of dialogism in novels. Dialogue is a fundamental part of drama, but Bakhtin side-
lined the necessity of dialogues in plays. Bakhtin’s dialogism is an extract from dialogue, which is the core of all plays
especially in Shakespearean plays. Shakespearean characters live through their dialogues. Shakespeare as a writer is
the embodiment of human freedom. This paper fully focuses on the multiple theories of Mikhail Bakhtin’s ‘Dialogic
theory and its various dimensions and an attempt at the Bakhtini an theory of dialogism in Shakespearian plays
especially King Lear and Macbeth. The dialogues used in Shakespearean plays are addressed to someone. The
language of King Lear and Macbeth are dialogic in multiple scenes and are both the fulfillment of desired intentions
and communication. Polyphony of language emerges due to conflict and tension. Language is never a simple means
of extracting the world of abstract ideas into extensive forms. It is deeply charged with significance; it stays even
beyond the scope and control of the speaker. The interpretations of language are multi-dimensional.

7
 Indian Journal of Natural Sciences www.tnsroindia.org.in ©IJONS

Vol.14 / Issue 82 / Feb / 2024 International Bimonthly (Print) – Open Access ISSN: 0976 – 0997
Kuriakose Varkey and Parul Mishra

REFERENCES
et al.,

1. Bakhtin, Mikahil.1984. Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics. Edited and translated by Caryl Emerson. Minneapolis:
University of Minnesota Press.
2. Bostad, Finn.et al.Bakhtinian Perspectives on Language and Culture: Meaning in Language, Art and New Media. New
York: Palgrave Macmillan. 2004.
3. Gardiner. Michael. The Dialogic of Critique: M.M. Bakhtin and the Theory of Ideology. London: Routledge. 1992
4. Holquist, Michael. Dialogism. New York: Routledge, 2002.
5. Johnson, Ben. To the Memory of My Beloved, The Author William Shakespeare‛. Cambridge University.1623.
6. Peachey, G. and Mikhail Bakhtin: The Word in the World (1st ed.). London: Routledge, 2007.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203962800
7. Shakespeare, W. First South Asian ed., Cambridge University Press, 2012
8. Taghizadeh, Ali and Faizi, Hamed. ‚Dialogism and Carnival in Virginia Woolf's To The Light House: A
Bakhtinian Reading.2015.

View publication stats