EFL Learners’ Perceptions of a Method Allowing Subjective Interpretation of Literary Texts: A Data-Driven Approach

Seyyed Ali Ostovar-Namaghi

Abstract


This study aims at conceptualizing students’ views concerning a method that allows subjective interpretation of literary texts. To this end, twelve EFL learners’ views were theoretically sampled and analyzed iteratively through the rigorous schemes of grounded theory. The results yielded a set of propositions all illustrating the potential of subjective interpretation of literary texts for creating a lively atmosphere for negotiation and redefining language learning and teaching tasks. The implications of the study for syllabus designers, test developers, teachers and learners are profound. However, further studies need to be undertaken in other similar contexts before the field could systematically allow the introduction of literary texts for learners’ subjective interpretation.

 


Keywords


Subjective interpretation; literary texts; learners’ perceptions; grounded theory

Full Text:

PDF

References


Belcher, D. & Hirvela, A. (2000). Literature and L2 composition: Revisiting the debate. Journal of Second Language Writing 9.1, 21–39.

Brumfit, C., & Carter, R. (1986). Literature and language teaching. Oxford & New York: OUP.

Bryant, A., & Charmaz, K. (2007a). Grounded theory research: Methods and practices. In A. Bryant & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of grounded theory (pp. 1-28). London: SAGE.

Cadorath, J. & Harris, S. (1998). Unplanned Classroom Language and Teacher Training., ELT Journal, 52/3, 188.

Carter, R & Long, M. (1991). Teaching Literature. Longman.

Carter, R. (1997). Investigating English discourse. London: Routledge.

Carter, R., & McRae, J. (1996). Language, literature and the learner, creative classroom practice. London: Longman.

Carter, R. & D. Nunan (eds.) (2000). The Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Celce-Murcia, M. (ed.) (2001). Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd edn.). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Corbin, J. and Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory. 3rd ed., London: Sage.

Diaz-Santos, G. (2000). Technothrillers and English for science and technology. English for Specific Purposes 19.3, 221–236.

Donato, R., & Brooks, F. (2004). Literary discussions and advanced speaking functions: researching the (Dis)connection. Foreign Language Annals, 37 (2), 183-199.

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. New York: Aldine Publishing Company.

Hall, G. (2005) Literature in language education. London: Macmillan.

Hanauer, D. (2001). The task of poetry reading and second language learning. Applied Linguistics 22.3, 295–323.

Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and learning in the language classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hirvela, A. (1989). Five bad reasons why language teachers avoid literature. British Journal of Language Teaching, 27.3, 127–132.

Hirvela, A. (2005). ESL students and the use of literature in composition courses. Teaching English in the Two-Year College, 33(1), 70–77.

Hutcheon, L. (1989). The politics of postmodernism. London: Routledge.

Kim, M. (2004). Literature discussions in adult L2 learning. Language and Education, 18(2), 145-166.

Kramsch, C. (2000) Social discursive constructions of self in L2 learning. In J.P. Lantolf (ed.), Sociocultural theory and second language learning . Oxford University Press.

Marlowe, B. A. & Page, M. L. (2005). Creating and sustaining the constructivist classroom (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Matthews, W. J. (2003). Constructivism in the classroom: Epistemology, history, and empirical evidence. Teacher Education Quarterly, 30(3), 51-64.

Meskill, C. & Ranglova, K. (2000). Sociocollaborative language learning in Bulgaria. In M.

Warschauer & R. Kern (eds.) Network-based language teaching: concepts and practice (20–40). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J.C. & Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching: An Anothology of current practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Sercu, L., & Bandura, E. (2005). Foreign language teachers and intercultural competence. An international investigation. Clevedon: Multiligual Matters.

Sidhu, G. K. (2003). Literature in the language classrooms: Seeing through the eyes of learners. In Ganakumaran & Edwin Malachi (eds.). Teaching of literature in ESL/EFL contexts (pp. 88-110). Petaling Jaya: Sasbadi-Melta ELT Series.

Strauss, A. and Corbin, J. (1994). Grounded Theory methodology: An overview, In Denzin, N., K. & Y. S. Lincoln, (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (pp. 1-18). Sage Publications, London.

Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and Procedures for Developing Grounded Theory (2nd Ed). London: Sage

Thompson, C. (2000). Critical literacy and text selection in English for academic purposes courses. Prospect 15.2, 39–47.

Torrance, E. P. (1995). Why fly? A philosophy of creativity. Greenwich, CT: Ablex.

Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Weist, V. D. (2004). Literature in lower-level courses: making progress in both language and reading skills. Foreign Language Annals 37.2, 209–221.

Yang, A. (2001). Reading and the non-academic learner: a mystery solved. System 29.4, 450– 460.

Zubair, S. (2003). Women’s critical literacy in a Pakistani classroom. Changing English 10.2, 163–173.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.2n.5p.1

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

2012-2019 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD

International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature

To make sure that you can receive messages from us, please add the journal emails into your e-mail 'safe list'. If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox', check your 'bulk mail' or 'junk mail' folders.