Cover not available
Part of
Scientific Approaches to Literature in Learning Environments
Edited by Michael Burke, Olivia Fialho and Sonia Zyngier
[Linguistic Approaches to Literature 24] 2016
► pp. 1–16

Chapter 1. Empirical approaches to the study of literature in learning environments

An overview

Due to the variety of areas involved in the scientific study of literature in learning environments, this chapter provides an overview in six parts. Part 1 focuses on students’ perceptions of literature, how readers construct literary interpretation in the classroom, the growth of literary expertise in literary response, and instructional factors in literary interpretation. Part 2 looks at studies on creative writing in pedagogical settings. Part 3 discusses recent studies on pedagogical stylistics. Part 4 aims at research on online environments while Part 5 centers on book clubs and reading groups. In Part 6, the synopses of the contributions to the volume signal the advances this book brings to the area.
Keywords: empirical, learning, literary reading, scientific study of literature
Published online: 22 July 2016
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/lal.24.01fia
References (95)
References
Adolphs, S., & Carter, R. (2002). Point of view and semantic prosodies in Virginia Woolf's To the Lighthouse . Poetica, 58, 7–20.Google Scholar
Andringa, E. (1996). Effects of ‘narrative distance’ on readers’ emotional involvement and response. Poetics, 23(6), 431-452. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Archer, D. (2007). Computer-assisted literary stylistics: The state of the field. In M. Lambrou & P. Stockwell (Eds.), Contemporary stylistics (pp. 244–256). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Archer, D., Culpeper, J., & Rayson, P. (2009). Love—“a familiar or a devil”? An exploration of key domains in Shakespeare's comedies and tragedies. In D. Archer (Ed.), What's in a Word-list? Investigating word frequency and keyword extraction (pp. 137–157). Farnham: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Bal, P.M., Butterman, O.S., & Bakker, A.B. (2011). The influence of fictional narrative experience on work outcomes: A conceptual analysis and research model. Review of General Psychology, 15, 361–370. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bortolussi, M., & Dixon, P. (1996). The effects of formal training on literary reception. Poetics, 23, 471-487. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burke M. (2010a). Why care about pedagogical stylistics? Language and Literature, 19(1), 7–11. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burke, M. (2010b). Rhetorical pedagogy: Teaching students how to write a stylistics paper. Language and Literature, 19(1), 77-92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (ed.). (2010c). Special issue Issues in pedagogical stylistics . Language and Literature, 19(1).Google Scholar
Burke, M., Csábi, S., Week, L, & Zerkowitz J. (Eds.) (2012). Pedagogical stylistics: Current trends in language, literature and ELT. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Clark, U., & Zyngier, S. (2003). Towards a pedagogical stylistics. Language and Literature, 12, 339 - 351. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Culpeper, J. (2009). Keyness: Words, parts-of-speech and semantic categories in the character-talk of Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet . International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 14(1), 29–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Davidson, C.N., & Goldberg, D.T. (2009). The future of learning institution in a digital age. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Disney, D. (Ed.) (2014). Exploring second language creative writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Earthman, E. (1992). Creating the virtual work: Readers’ processes in understanding literary texts. Research in the Teaching of English, 26(4), 351-384.Google Scholar
Eva-Wood, A.L. (2004). Thinking and feeling poetry: Exploring meanings aloud. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96, 182–191. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fialho, O. (2006). Assessing literary education: An empirical investigation of students’ conceptualizations of Literature in a Canadian setting. Paper presented at IGEL 2006: International Congress. International Society for the Empirical Study of Literature. Chiemsee, Munich, August 5-9, 2006.
. (2012). Empirical stylistics in the literature classroom: Looking ahead. Workshop organized at Poetics and Linguistics Association: PALA, Special Interest Group – Pedagogical Stylistics: Heidelberg, July 15-16, 2012.
Fialho, O., Moffat, C., & Miall, D.S. (2010). An empirical study of students' concepts of literary education. Paper presented at IGEL Conference (International Society for the Empirical Study of Literature and Media), Utrecht, 7-11 July, 2010.
Fialho, O., Miall, D.S., & Zyngier, S. (2012). Experiencing or interpreting literature: Wording instructions. In M. Burke, S. Csábi, L. Week & J. Zerkowitz (Eds.), Pedagogical stylistics: Current trends in language, literature and ELT. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Fialho, O., Zyngier, S., & Miall, D.S. (2011). Interpretation and experience: Two pedagogical interventions observed. English in Education, 45(3), 236-253. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fuller, D. (2007). Listening to the readers is ‘Canada Reads’. Canadian Literature, 193, 11-36.Google Scholar
Giovanelli, M. (2010). Pedagogical stylistics: A text world theory approach to the teaching of poetry. English in Education, 44(3), 214-231. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2013). Cognitive linguistics in the English classroom: New possibilities for thinking about teaching grammar. Teaching English, 3, 61-65.Google Scholar
Giovanelli, M., & Clayton, D. (eds.) (in press). Knowing about Language: Linguistics and the Secondary English Classroom. London: Routledge.
Giovanelli, M., & Mason, J. (2015). 'Well I don't feel that’: Schemas, worlds and authentic reading in the classroom. English in Education, 49(1), 41-55. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graves, B. (1996). The study of literary expertise as a research strategy. Poetics, 23, 385-403. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graves, B. & Frederiksen, C. (1991). Literary expertise in the description of a fictional narrative. Poetics, 20, 1-26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Groenendijk, T., Janssen, T.M., Rijlaarsdam, G., & van den Bergh, H. (2008). How do secondary school students write poetry? How creative writing processes relate to final products. L1-Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 8(3), 57-80.Google Scholar
Hall, R.M. (2003). The ‘Oprahfication’ of literacy: Reading ‘Oprah’s Book Club’. College English, 65(6), 646-667. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hanauer, D. (1995). The effects of educational background on literary and poetic text categorization judgements. In G. Rusch (Ed.), Empirical approaches to literature: Proceedings of the Fourth Biannual Conference of the International Society for the Empirical Study of Literature, Budapest, August 1994 (pp. 338-347). Siegen: Lumis.Google Scholar
. (1999). Attention and literary education: A model of literary knowledge development. Language Awareness, 8, 15-29. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2010). Poetry as research: Exploring second language poetry writing. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2014). Appreciating the beauty of second language poetry writing. In D. Disney (ed.), Exploring second language Creative Writing: Beyond Babel (pp. 11-22). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hartley J. (2001). Reading Groups. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heller, W. (2010). Teaching Shakespeare in the elementary school through dramatic activity, play production, and technology: A case study. In W. van Peer, S. Zyngier, & V.P. Viana, Literary education and digital learning: Methods and technologies for humanities studies (pp. 57-186). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference (IGI Global). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hockey, S. (2000). Electronic texts in the humanities. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Holmes, J., & Stubbe, M. (2003). Power and politeness in the workplace. A sociolinguistic analysis of talk at Work. Harlow: Pearson.Google Scholar
Hoover, D., Culpeper, J., & O’Halloran, K. (2014). Digital literary studies: Corpus approaches to poetry, prose, and drama. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Janssen, T., Braaksma, M., Rijlaarsdam, M., & van den Bergh, H. (2012). Flexibility in reading literature. Differences between good and poor adolescent readers. Scientific Study of Literature, 2(1), 83-107. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Janssen, T., Braaksma, M., & Couzijn, M. (2009). Self-questioning in the literature classroom: Effects on students’ interpretation and appreciation of short stories. L1 – Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 9(1), 91-116.Google Scholar
Janssen, T., Braaksma, M., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (2006). Literary reading activities of good and weak students: A think aloud study. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 12(1), 35-53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Janssen, T., & Rijlaarsdam, G. (1996). Students as self-assessors: Learning experiences of literature teaching in secondary schools. In Ed Marum (Ed.), Children and books in the modern world: Contemporary perspectives on literacy (pp. 98-114). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
. (1995). Approaches to the teaching of literature: A national survey of literary education in Dutch secondary schools. In R.J. Kreuz & M.S. MacNealy (Eds.), Empirical approaches to literature and aesthetics (pp. 513-536). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Jeffries, L., & McIntyre, D. (eds) (2011). Teaching stylistics. Houndmills: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Jones, K., McLean, M., Amigoni, D., & Kinsman, M. (2005). Investigating the production of university English in mass higher education. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 4(3), 247-264. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kieft, M., Rijlaarsdam, G., & Van den Bergh, H. (2008). An aptitude treatment interaction approach to writing-to-learn. Learning and Instruction, 18, 379-390. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Knights, B. (2010). The implied aesthetic of English teaching. Wordplay 3. Accessed 20 October 2014. Available at: <[URL]>Google Scholar
Lee, C. (2011). Education and the study of literature. Scientific Study of Literature, 11(1), 49-58. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leech G., & Short, M. ([1981]2007). Style in fiction: A linguistic introduction to English fictional prose. Harlow: Pearson.Google Scholar
Long, E. (2003). Book clubs: Women and the uses of reading in everyday life. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Louw, W.E. (1993). Irony in the text or insincerity in the writer? The diagnostic potential of semantic prosodies. In M. Baker, G. Francis, & E. Tognini-Bonelli (Eds.), Text and technology: In honour of John Sinclair (pp. 157–174). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mahlberg, M. (2012). Corpus analysis of literary texts. In C.A. Chapelle (Ed.), The encyclopedia of applied linguistics. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mahlberg, M., & Smith, C. (2010). Corpus approaches to prose fiction: Civility and body language in Pride and prejudice . In D. McIntyre & B. Busse (Eds.), Language and style (pp. 449–67). Houndmills: Palgrave.DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mar, R.A., Oatley, K., Hirsch, J., dela Paz, J., & Peterson, J.B. (2006). Bookworms versus nerds: Exposure to fiction versus non-fiction, divergent associations with social ability, and the simulation of fictional social worlds. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 694-712. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McIntryre, D. (2011). The place of stylistics in the English curriculum. In L. Jeffries & D. McIntyre (Eds.), Teaching stylistics (pp. 9-29). Houndmills: Palgrave.Google Scholar
McIntyre, D. (2012). Corpus stylistics in the classroom. In M. Burke, S. Csábi, L. Week, & J. Zerkowitz (Eds.), Pedagogical stylistics: Current trends in language, literature and ELT (pp. 113-125). London: Continuum.Google Scholar
McIntyre, D., & Walker, B. (2010). How can corpora be used to explore the language of poetry and drama? In A. O'Keeffe & M. McCarthy (Eds), The Routledge handbook of corpus linguistics (pp. 516–530). Abingdon: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Miall, D. (1996). Empowering the reader: Literary response and classroom learning. In R.J. Kreuz & S.M. MacNealy (Eds.), Empirical approaches to literature and aesthetics (pp. 463-478). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Miall, D.S., Kuiken, D., & Gifford, J. (2002). Reasons for reading and studying literature. Paper presented at IGEL 2002: International Congress. International Society for the Empirical Study of Literature. University of Pécs, Hungary. August 21-24, 2002.
Mullany, L. (2007). Gendered discourse in the professional workplace. Houndmills: Palgrave. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Keeffe, A., McCarthy, M., & Carter, R. (2007). From corpus to classroom: Language use and language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peplow, D. (2011). “Oh, I’ve know a lot of Irish people”: Reading groups and the negotiation of literary interpretation. Language and Literature, 20(4), 295-315. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peskin, J. (1998). Constructing meaning when reading poetry: An Expert-Novice study. Cognition and Instruction, 16(3), 235-263. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2007). The genre of poetry: Secondary school students’ conventional expectations and interpretive operations. English in Education, 41(3), 20-36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2010). The development of poetic literacy through the school years. Discourse Processes, 47, 77-103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2011). The social and educational benefits of the scientific study of literature: From picture books to poetry. In F. Hakemulder (Ed.), De stralende lezer: Wetenschappelijk onderzoek naar de invloed van het lezen (pp. 25-5). Delft: Eburon.Google Scholar
Peskin, J., Allen, G., & Wells-Jopling, R. (2010). The “Educated Imagination”: Applying instructional research to the teaching of symbolic interpretation of poetry. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 53(6), 498-507. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peskin, J., & Wells-Jopling, R. (2012). Fostering symbolic interpretation during adolescence. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 33(1), 13-23. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Radway, J. (1984). Reading the romance. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
. (1997). A feeling for books: The book-of-the-month club, literary taste, and middle-class desire. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
Ravassat, M., & Culpeper, J. (2011). Stylistics and Shakespeare’s language: Transdisciplinary approaches. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Rayson, P. (2008). From key words to key semantic domains. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 13(4), 519–549. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ross, C.S. (1999). Finding without seeking: The information encounter in the context of reading for pleasure. Information Processing Management, 35, 783–799. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scott, M. (2008). WordSmith tools. Version 5.0 .Google Scholar
Semino, E., & Short, M. (2004). Corpus stylistics: Speech, writing and thought presentation in a corpus of English writing. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Short, M.,Busse, B., & Plummer, P . (2006). The web-based language and style course, e-learning and stylistics. Language and Literature, 15(3), 219-233. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saklofske, J. (2010). Plays well with others: The value of developing multiplayer digital gamespaces for literary education. In W. van Peer, S. Zyngier, & V.P. Viana (Eds.), Literary education and digital learning: Methods and technologies for Humanities studies (pp. 130-156). Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference (IGI Global). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spiro, J. (2014). Learner and writer voices: Learners as writers and the search for authorial voice. In D. Disney (ed.), Exploring second language creative writing: Beyond Babel (pp. 23-40). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stubbs, M. (2005). Conrad in the computer: Examples of quantitative stylistic methods. Language and Literature, 14(1), 5-24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tabata, T. (2002). Investigating stylistic variation in Dickens through correspondence analysis of word-class distribution. In T. Saito, J. Nakamura, & S. Yamazaki (Eds.), English corpus linguistics in Japan (pp. 165–182). Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
Toolan, M. (2009). Narrative progression in the short story: A corpus stylistic approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Peer, W., Zyngier, S., & Viana, V.P. (2010). Literary education and digital learning: Methods and technologies for humanities studies. Hershey PA: Information Science Reference (IGI Global). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Schooten, E., & de Glopper, K. (2003). The development of literary response in secondary education. Poetics, 31, 155-187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Schooten, E., de Glopper, K., & Stoel, R.D. (2004). Development of attitude toward reading adolescent literature and literary reading behavior. Poetics, 32, 343-386. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Watson, G., & Zyngier, S. (2006). Literature and stylistics for language learners: Theory and practice. Houndmills: Palgrave. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Weick, K.E. (1993). The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 628–652. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Whiteley, S. (2011a). Text World Theory, real readers and emotional responses to The remains of the day . Language and Literature, 20(1), 23-42. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. (2011b). Talking about ‘An accomodation’: The implications of discussion group data for community engagement and pedagogy. Language and Literature 20(3), 236-256. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zyngier, S. (2006). Stylistics: Pedagogical applications. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (2nd ed.; pp. 226-232). Oxford: Elsevier. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zyngier, S., Barsch, A., & Miall, D.S. (2002). What is literature, really? Motivations to study. Literature and reading across different cultures. Igel Newsletter, 1(1), 6-13. Available at: <[URL]>Google Scholar
Zyngier, S. (2008). Macbeth through the computer: Literary evaluation and pedagogical implications. In W. van Peer (Ed.), The quality of literature: Linguistic studies in literary evaluation (pp. 169-190). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zyngier, S. et al. (Orgs.). 2001. Conhecimento e imaginação: Coletânea dos trabalhos do I ECEL – Encontro de ciência empírica da literatura. Rio de Janeiro: Serviço de Publicações da Faculdade de Letras da UFRJ.Google Scholar
Zyngier, S., & Valente, A. (Orgs.). (2002). Fatos e ficções: Estudos empíricos de literatura. Rio de Janeiro: Serviço de Publicações da Faculdade de Letras da UFRJ.Google Scholar
Zyngier, S. et al. (Orgs.). (2003). Pontes e transgressões: Estudos empíricos de processos culturais. Rio de Janeiro: Serviço de Publicações da Faculdade de Letras da UFRJ.Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Whiteley, Sara & Patricia Canning
2017. Reader response research in stylistics. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 26:2 ► pp. 71 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 21 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.