"For the novelist working in prose, the object is always entangled in someone else's discourse about it, it is already present with qualifications, an object of dispute that is conceptualized and evaluated variously, inseparable from the heteroglot social apperception of it. The novelist speaks of this "already qualified world" in a language that is heteroglot and internally dialogized. Thus both object and language are revealed to the novelist in their historical dimension, in the process of social and heteroglot becoming. For the novelist, there is no world outside his socio-heteroglot perception--and there is no language outside the heteroglot intentions that stratify that world (The Dialogic Imagination 330)."
Heteroglot language should here be considered in a different respect. To the extent that language is "double-voiced," or "internally dialogized," Bahktin implies language (and meaning) to have network form. If every word is intersected by the accents of many, and if those accents are accumulated and embedded in the word as time passes, it seems to me that the word once again must be positioned as a node. Heteroglossia emerges from popular intercourse and from the past. Meaning, then, is not only determined socially, but also historically. Language cannot escape its place in the network established by the people who use it.
Hypertext is just as capable of having those historical influences incorporated into it as the social influences. The boundless digital space can hold an immensity of background material that helps to show how the particular "accents" characterizing a certain discourse came to be. This would be quite infeasible in the print text, which at best could only represent a multiplicity of voices to give the word a socially informed meaning. Hypertext is much more prepared to accommodate the historical slant, especially if the reader isn't knowledgeable enough to grasp allusions embedded within the text.