This paper uses two principal examples to argue that experimentalist research paradigms in empirical literary research can be suggestive but that results are not easily extrapolatable to actual real world literary reading events, particularly where, as with free indirect discourse (fid), the phenomenon to be investigated is demonstrably complex, multifaceted and highly contingent. More broadly, the paper raises the issue of whether in fact most literary reading is not typically as complicated as fid, in which case complementary or alternative research approaches may be needed. I close by advocating more nuanced qualitative or ethnographic approaches which respect the complexity of the phenomena under investigation to achieve better understanding, even at the possible expense of seductively neat graphs, tables and statistics. As van Peer suggests in my opening epigraph, empirical research at its best can be highly suggestive. My argument is simply that we need always to remember that what we think of as empirical research should not be limited to experimentalist paradigms. The empirical literary research community will be able to say more useful things about fid and the wider complexities of literary reading by complementing more experimentalist work with more contextually sensitive investigations, to the mutual benefit of both.
2016. Reading in the age of the internet. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 25:3 ► pp. 201 ff.
Allington, Daniel & Joan Swann
2009. Researching literary reading as social practice. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 18:3 ► pp. 219 ff.
Allington, Daniel & Joan Swann
2011. The Mediation of Response: A Critical Approach to Individual and Group Reading Practices. In The History of Reading, Volume 3, ► pp. 80 ff.
Bartl, Sara & Ernestine Lahey
2023. ‘As the title implies’: How readers talk about titles in Amazon book reviews. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 32:2 ► pp. 209 ff.
Bell, Alice, Sam Browse, Alison Gibbons & David Peplow
Bell, Alice, Astrid Ensslin, Isabelle van der Bom & Jen Smith
2019. A reader response method not just for ‘you’. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 28:3 ► pp. 241 ff.
Benwell, Bethan
2009. ‘A pathetic and racist and awful character’: ethnomethodological approaches to the reception of diasporic fiction. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 18:3 ► pp. 300 ff.
Carney, Gemma M, Jane Lugea, Carolina Fernandez-Quintanilla, Paula Devine & Ulla Kriebernegg
2023. “Sometimers, Alzheimer’s? I love that! That’s definitely me”: Readers’ Responses to Fictional Dementia Narratives. The Gerontologist 63:10 ► pp. 1610 ff.
Giovanelli, Marcello
2022. Cognitive Grammar and Readers’ Perceived Sense of Closeness: A Study of Responses to Mary Borden’s ‘Belgium’. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 31:3 ► pp. 407 ff.
Kirkham, Sam
2011. Personal style and epistemic stance in classroom discussion. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 20:3 ► pp. 201 ff.
Knipp, Raphaela
2016. Vom alltäglichen Umgang mit Literatur – am Beispiel des Literaturtourismus zu Joyces Ulysses. Zeitschrift für Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik 46:4 ► pp. 479 ff.
Lugea, Jane & Brian Walker
2023. How to ‘Do’ Stylistics. In Stylistics, ► pp. 251 ff.
Peplow, David
2011. ‘Oh, I’ve known a lot of Irish people’: Reading groups and the negotiation of literary interpretation. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 20:4 ► pp. 295 ff.
Pianzola, Federico, Simone Rebora, Gerhard Lauer & David Orrego-Carmona
2020. Wattpad as a resource for literary studies. Quantitative and qualitative examples of the importance of digital social reading and readers’ comments in the margins. PLOS ONE 15:1 ► pp. e0226708 ff.
Whiteley, Sara & Patricia Canning
2017. Reader response research in stylistics. Language and Literature: International Journal of Stylistics 26:2 ► pp. 71 ff.
Wirag, Andreas
2020. The scope of empirical narratology. Frontiers of Narrative Studies 6:1 ► pp. 113 ff.
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 march 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.