A case study in defining literacy: David Olson's journey from the Great Divide to the Great Beyond

Snyder, Howard R.

doi:10.1007/bf01809415

Cited by 3 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The implicit divide and opposition between orality and literacy is simply not realistic in view of the extensive ethnographic reports from around the world (Finnegan, 2001;Theall, 1992), and research about literacy practices (Finnegan, 1988;Snyder, 1990;Reder & Davila, 2005), which stresses the interaction of orality and literacy. This interactive scenario holds true for both ancient and medieval traditions.…”

Section: Problematic Aspectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Indigenous Oral History Reader

Schwartz

2022

mlj

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The oral history of Indigenous people in Canada has been recognized by mainstream legal systems in Canada over the past few decades as being of fundamental importance in court cases and negotiations with Indigenous peoples. As Indigenous peoples further exercise their right to self-government, they will continue drawing their oral traditions to define and develop their autonomous legal system. This anthology attempts to collect a wide variety of materials that embody many perspectives. It attempts to place those materials within a conceptual framework that might be helpful in looking at Indigenous oral history, and indeed oral history generally. That framework includes viewing oral history in three dimensions of time - testimony about recent events, oral histories that encompass an individual's lifetime, and oral traditions that are passed down from generation to generation. The framework includes looking at oral history in the context of how many cultures and traditions incorporate oral history in their legal systems and cultures. It asks both how values and methods differ among communities and how they reflect widespread or virtually universal tendencies. The framework also invites the reader to consider the different ways in which oral evidence can or should be reinforced or qualified by references to other sources of information, such as other oral evidence, documentary testimony and physical evidence of various kinds. It is hoped that this collection will be of assistance to others in studying or developing their own teaching materials in this dynamic area.

show abstract

Section: Problematic Aspectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Indigenous Oral History Reader

Schwartz

2022

mlj

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Starting off with an overstated adversarial preconception of orality and literacy, Loubser operates with an unhistorical dualism, contrary to his own intentions. The implicit divide and opposition between orality and literacy is simply not realistic in view of the extensive ethnographic reports from around the world (Finnegan, 2001;Theall, 1992), and research about literacy practices (Finnegan, 1988;Snyder, 1990;Reder & Davila, 2005), which stresses the interaction of orality and literacy. This interactive scenario holds true for both ancient and medieval traditions.…”

Section: Problematic Aspectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Spelling Eye Versus the Listening Ear: Oral Poetics and New Testament Writings

Botha

2018

SCRIP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concepts such as orality, media criticism, manuscript culture, oral reading and performance have been introduced to New Testament scholarship since the 1980s, but their impact on and contribution to mainstream research are still in question. A resurgent interest in these socio-cultural notions is raising fundamental questions about approaches to and conclusions about early Christian texts. Some of the implications and possibilities of these developments are reviewed and briefly illustrated. Rather than emphasising another method or 'criticism' that could be 'added' to the repertoire of biblical scholarship, it is proposed that a multifaceted conceptualising of 'speaking-hearing-remembering', an 'oral poetics', inform NT scholarship.

show abstract

“…I conclude with a brief exploration of two leads which I find in Olson's published works, leads which promise to show us something of a way out of the perplexities which currently dominate at least my own efforts to understand not only Olson's thinking but also the issue of literacy with which he continues to be concerned. KEYWORDS: meaning, text, theory, evidence, literacy, cognitive, epistemology, ontology, hermeneutics, contextualism, Olson, Heidegger, Husserl David Olson's conclusion to his "Reply to Snyder" (Olson, 1990) plunges us afresh into the issues and concerns which Howard R. Snyder raised with regard to Olson's "pilgrimage" (Snyder, 1990), and to which Olson replied. Olson wrote:…”

mentioning

confidence: 94%

A response to David Olson's ?reply to Snyder?

McCormick¹

1993

Interchange

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this brief paper, I seek to clarify David Olson's position on literacy and textual meaning, especially with regard to the relation between theory and evidence. I do so by analysing his textual formulations. I find that I am not quite sure what exactly that position is. Nonetheless, I remain equally convinced that Olson is on to something. The first portion of the article is taken up with trying to track down a coherent reading of Olson's understanding of literacy, and thus in the process to point out areas calling for further clarification. I conclude with a brief exploration of two leads which I find in Olson's published works, leads which promise to show us something of a way out of the perplexities which currently dominate at least my own efforts to understand not only Olson's thinking but also the issue of literacy with which he continues to be concerned. KEYWORDS: meaning, text, theory, evidence, literacy, cognitive, epistemology, ontology, hermeneutics, contextualism, Olson, Heidegger, Husserl David Olson's conclusion to his "Reply to Snyder" (Olson, 1990) plunges us afresh into the issues and concerns which Howard R. Snyder raised with regard to Olson's "pilgrimage" (Snyder, 1990), and to which Olson replied. Olson wrote:To doubt the autonomy of textual meaning is equivalent to denying the autonomy of evidence, testimony, and facts from the theories, inferences, and interpretations they sustain. It is to give away, for nothing, much too much. (1990, p. 60) Just how, though, is this conclusion to be reconciled with what Olson has written elsewhere? For example, confining myself here only to texts from which

show abstract

A case study in defining literacy: David Olson's journey from the Great Divide to the Great Beyond

Cited by 3 publications

References 12 publications

Indigenous Oral History Reader

Indigenous Oral History Reader

The Spelling Eye Versus the Listening Ear: Oral Poetics and New Testament Writings

A response to David Olson's ?reply to Snyder?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About