english second language learners' interpretation and appreciation of literary texts

187 Pages·2012·4.04 MB·English

by  Chris Schoeman

ENGLISH SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNERS’ INTERPRETATION AND
APPRECIATION OF LITERARY TEXTS: A SOUTH AFRICAN CASE STUDY OF
MULTILITERACY/MULTIMODALITY

by

KRISTOFF SCHOEMAN

submitted in accordance with the requirements for
the degree of

MASTER OF ARTS WITH SPECIALISATION IN TESOL
(TEACHING ENGLISH TO SPEAKERS OF OTHER LANGUAGES)

at the

UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AFRICA

SUPERVISOR: PROF B SPENCER

February 2011

1
Acknowledgements
The contribution of the following individuals in the creation, compilation and completion of
this dissertation is acknowledged:
 Professor Brenda Spencer, my supervisor, for her prompt feedback, guidance and
encouragement.
 My English teachers and lecturers who introduced me to the English language, and
cultivated my love for English literature. I owe much to my Grade 11 and 12 teacher,
Ms. Botha.
 The eleven Grade 10 learners who participated in my empirical study. They
introduced me to their lifeworld, and taught me unforgettable lessons which will stay
with me for the rest of my life.
 Teacher Letitia for her willingness to assist me with the data collection of this study,
and for sharing her documents with me.
 Professor MB Mokgalabone, his wife and daughter for their assistance with the
arrangements in Polokwane.
 My parents, Chris and Sonja, for their continuous encouragement, support and
assistance with the finalisation of my dissertation.

2
Abstract
This dissertation set out to investigate if the use of visually symbolic representations in
addition to the more traditional written methods of the key elements (theme, setting,
characterisation) of a short story would support South African ESL learners to grow in their
interpretation and appreciation of English literary texts. The assertion was that using a
multimodal (verbal-visual) transmediated interpretation of the key elements (theme, setting,
characterisation) of a short story might afford ESL learners ―a deeper reading‖ (inferential
comprehension and appreciation) of a literary text, and that the learners could also be
supported to grow in their interpretation and appreciation of English literature. The research
findings of the literary analysis project revealed that ESL learners with a ―satisfactory‖
English proficiency can be supported by using transmediation to engage them in rich
interpretations of literary genres to realise their interpretations linguistically in written
academic essays.
Key Terms:
ESL; code-switching; collaborative learning; mandala; multiliteracy; multimodal;
multiliteracies pedagogy; short stories; transmediation; verbal-visual.

3
Declaration
Student number: 35256796

I declare that ENGLISH SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNERS’ INTERPRETATION AND
APPRECIATION OF LITERARY TEXTS: A SOUTH AFRICAN CASE STUDY OF
MULTILITERACY/MULTIMODALITY is my own work and that all the sources that I have
used or quoted have been indicated and acknowledged by means of complete references.

SIGNATURE

DATE
(Mr K Schoeman)

4
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Title page 1
Acknowledgements 2
Abstract 3
Declaration 4

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 16
2. PROBLEM STATEMENT 19
3. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE (PURPOSE) OF THE STUDY 26
4. THESIS STATEMENT 28
5. DELINEATIONS AND LIMITATIONS 28
6. DEFINITION OF TERMS AND CONCEPTS 30
6.1. SEMIOTICS 30
6.2. SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION (SLA) AND LEARNING 31
6.3. SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION (SLA) AND LITERATURE TEXTS
33
6.4. MULTILITERACY/MULTIMODAL PEDAGOGY 35
6.5. MULTIMODAL TEXTS AND LEARNING 36
6.6. TRANSMEDIATION AND TRANSDUCTION 37
7. UNDERLYING ASSUMPTIONS 39
8. SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY 40
9. BRIEF CHAPTER OVERVIEW 40

5
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
MODERN SEMIOTIC THEORIES WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO NON-
LINGUISTIC MODES OF COMMUNICATION AND MULTILITERACIES
PEDAGOGY
1. INTRODUCTION 42
2. THE CONCEPTION OF THE SIGN AND MEANING IN GENERAL SEMIOTIC
THEORY 43
3. SEMIOTICIANS AND LINGUISTS’ ANALYSES OF NON-LINGUISTIC MODES
OF COMMUNICATION 45
3.1. FERDINAND SAUSSURE, CHARLES S PEIRCE AND THE PRAGUE AND
PARIS SCHOOLS 45
3.2. M.A.K. HALLIDAY’S GENERAL THEORY OF LANGUAGE AND
COMMUNICATION – THE SYSTEMIC FUNCTIONAL LINGUISTICS (SFL)
MODEL 46
3.3. THE HALLIDAYAN INTERPRETATIONS OF NON-LINGUIST MODES OF
COMMUNICATION WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO EDUCATIONAL
TEXTS 48
3.3.1. GUNTHER KRESS AND ROBERT HODGE’S LANGUAGE AS
IDEOLOGY (1979) AND SOCIAL SEMIOTICS (1988) 48
3.3.2. GUNTHER KRESS AND THEO VAN LEEUWEN’S READING
IMAGES (1990) AND READING IMAGES: THE GRAMMAR OF
VISUAL DESIGN (1996, 2006) 49
4. MULTILITRACIES PEDAGOGY: WHAT TEACHERS IN SCHOOLS CAN DO
52
4.1. THE CONCEPT OF PEDAGOGY OF MULITLITERACIES 52
4.2. THE “WHAT” OF A PEDAGOGY OF MULTILITERACIES 53
4.2.1. DESIGNS OF MEANING 53
4.2.1.1. Available designs 54
4.2.1.2. Designing 55
4.2.1.3. Redesigned 56
4.2.2. DIMENSIONS OF MEANING: METALANGUAGE 56
6
4.2.2.1. Criteria of a metalanguage in the school curriculum 56
4.2.2.2. Key terms for analysing design of meaning 57
a) The game of design of meaning 57
b) The angle of design of meaning 57
c) Intertextual characterisations 57
4.2.3. DESIGN ELEMENTS 58
4.2.3.1. Linguistic design 58
4.2.3.2. Designs of other modes of meaning 59
4.3. THE “HOW” OF A PEDAGOGY OF MULTILITERACIES 62
4.3.1. THE THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK: A THEORY OF PEDAGOGY
62
4.3.1.1. Four aspects of the pedagogy of multiliteracies schema
62
a) Situated practice 62
b) Overt instruction 63
c) Critical framing 63
d) Transformed practice 64
4.3.1.2. An historical and methodological perspective to the four
aspects of the multiliteracies pedagogy 64
4.3.1.3. An epistemological perspective to the four aspects of the
multiliteracies pedagogy 65
4.3.1.4. A cultural perspective to the four aspects of the
multiliteracies pedagogy 65
4.3.1.5. A growing body of multiliteracies research 66
a) Relevance of popular and mass media texts 66
b) Metalanguage for multiliteracies 66
c) Post-New London Group developments of a
metalanguage 66
4.3.1.6. Theory into practice: The International Multiliteracies
Project 66
7
5. “MULTILITERACIES”: NEW LITERACIES AND NEW LEARNING IN THE
DIGITAL AGE 69
5.1 THE “WHAT” OF MULTILITERACIES 69
5.1.1 DESIGNING MEANINGS 70
5.1.2 MODALITIES OF MEANING 71

5.1.2.1 The new media mix modes 71

5.1.2.2 Synaesthesia 72

a) Parallelism 72

b) Incommensurability 73

c) Paradoxical mix of parallelism and in commensurability between
modalities 73

d) Generalities between modalities 74

5.2 THE “HOW” OF MULTILITERACIES 75

6. CONCLUSION 77

CHAPTER 3
THE EMPIRICAL STUDY
1. INTRODUCTION 78

2. THE RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY OF THE STUDY 78

2.1. RESEARCH DESIGN 79

2.2. METHODOLOGY 80

2.2.1. PILOT STUDY 81
8
2.2.1.1. Introductory remarks 81

2.2.1.2. The outcomes of my pilot study 81

2.2.2. SAMPLING 82

2.2.3. DATA COLLECTION 84

2.2.3.1. Participant observation 84

2.2.3.2. Pre-teaching individual questionnaire 84

2.2.3.3. Whole class scaffolded mini-tasks 85

2.2.3.4. Group sessions for verbal-visual transmediated learning
85

2.2.3.5. Individual essay writing 87

2.2.3.6. Post-teaching focus group discussion 87

2.2.3.7. Individual evaluation and written reflection 87

2.2.4. DATA ANALYSIS 87

3. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS 89

4. CONCLUSION 91

CHAPTER 4
RESEARCH FINDINGS
1. INTRODUCTION 92
2. THE RESEARCH FINDINGS 92
2.1. PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION 92
2.2. PRE-TEACHING INDIVIDUAL QUESTIONNAIRE 94
2.3. WHOLE CLASS SCAFFOLDED MINI-TASKS 97
9
2.4. GROUP SESSIONS FOR THE VERBAL-VISIAL TRANSMEDIATED
LEARNING ACTIVITY 98
2.4.1. GROUP #1: “AIN’T NOBODY A STRANGER TO ME” 100
2.4.1.1. Visual representation 101
2.4.1.2. Characterisation 101
2.4.1.3. Setting 101
2.4.1.4. Theme 101
2.4.2. GROUP #2: “JUSTICE” 102
2.4.2.1. Visual representation 103
2.4.2.2. Characterisation 103
2.4.2.3. Setting 103
2.4.2.4. Theme 103
2.4.3. GROUP #3: “THE THREE BROTHERS AND THE POT OF GOLD”
104
2.4.3.1. Visual representation 105
2.4.3.2. Characterisation 105
2.4.3.3. Setting 105
2.4.3.4. Theme 105
2.4.4. GROUP #4: “MAISIE AND THE DOLPHIN” 106
2.4.4.1. Visual representation 107
2.4.4.2. Characterisation 107
2.4.4.3. Setting 108
2.4.4.4. Theme 108
2.5. INDIVIDUAL ESSAY WRITING 108
2.5.1. GROUP #1 109
2.5.2. GROUP #2 111
2.5.3. GROUP #3 111
10