The form of reading: Empirical studies of literariness

Miall, David S.; Kuiken, Don

doi:10.1016/s0304-422x(98)90003-1

Cited by 81 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…To our knowledge, the study presented here is the first one of its nature. The previous empirical studies from the literary theory background (Hanauer, 2001b; Hoffstaedter, 1987; Miall & Kuiken, 1994, 1998) that explored the special characteristics of reading literary texts did not link their research directly to language learning and typically focused on the reading process. This is true also for Hanauer (2001a), who focused on L2 readers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite the strong claims of the poststructuralistic approaches, there has not been, to our knowledge, an empirical study that has convincingly backed up the reader-oriented, receptionist claims (cf. Miall & Kuiken, 1998). There are studies demonstrating that expectations about the text genre (Zwaan, 1991, 1994) or reading goals in general (Schmalhofer & Glavanov, 1986; van den Broek, Lorch, Lindernholm, & Gustafson, 2001) influence how readers process and mentally represent texts and that the observed effects are not due to, for example, bare differences between, for example, fictional versus true stories (Hartung, Withers, Hagoort, & Willems, 2017).…”

Section: Background and Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…There are studies demonstrating that expectations about the text genre (Zwaan, 1991, 1994) or reading goals in general (Schmalhofer & Glavanov, 1986; van den Broek, Lorch, Lindernholm, & Gustafson, 2001) influence how readers process and mentally represent texts and that the observed effects are not due to, for example, bare differences between, for example, fictional versus true stories (Hartung, Withers, Hagoort, & Willems, 2017). However, only very few empirical studies (Hanauer, 1996, 1998a; Hoffstaedter, 1987; Miall & Kuiken, 1998) have attempted to differentiate explicitly whether linguistic features, on the one hand, or the readers’ reception, on the other hand, were influential in shaping the readers’ behavior. Hoffstaedter (1987) explored literary (in his terminology “poetic”) text processing and the conditions of its occurrence.…”

Section: Background and Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…It can be hypothesized that the shift to the word level may also be triggered by the foregrounding exhibited in literary texts (cf. Miall & Kuiken, 1998). As discussed in the previous section, according to the formalist view, the use of language devices associated with literature contributes to deautomatized processing of a text.…”

Section: Background and Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Mukařovský (1964), another formalist from the Prague School, introduced the term foregrounding in this context. Through foregrounding, that is, the systematic employment of a range of stylistic devices, the poetic language becomes more conscious to the reader compared to language of standard spoken discourse or informative text (cf., e.g., Miall & Kuiken, 1998). Foregrounding has become “a core concept of stylistics” (Yaping & Yuying, 2017, p. 28) and has been vividly discussed by both linguists and literary theoreticians throughout the 20th century up until the present years (e.g., Hakemulder, 2004; Halliday, 1973; Jeffries & McIntyre, 2010; Leech, 1970, Leech & Short, 2001, Levin, 1965; Van Peer, Zyngier, & Hakemulder, 2007; Zhang, 1994, 2017).…”

Section: Background and Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

The role of literariness in second language incidental vocabulary acquisition

Bordag

Rogahn

2018

Applied Psycholinguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In two reading experiments involving a self-paced reading task, we explored how literariness affects initial stages of incidental vocabulary acquisition during reading in second language German. In Experiment 1, literariness was operationalized along the formalist, language-driven approach, focusing on the role of literary devices and their assumed ability to draw readers’ attention to the verbal message itself. In Experiment 2, we included conventions related to reading fiction (book title, author name, and year of publishing) to modulate the reader’s mode of text processing, which defines literariness according to reader-driven approaches (e.g., reception theory). Contrary to the expectations based on the noticing hypothesis (Schmidt, 2012), we did not observe any advantage for incidental vocabulary acquisition in literary texts compared to nonliterary ones. However, in accordance with claims taking into account the limits of cognitive resources, we found evidence that acquisition of unknown words is impeded, if these directly participate in a literary device.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Background and Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Background and Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Background and Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Background and Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The role of literariness in second language incidental vocabulary acquisition

Bordag

Rogahn

2018

Applied Psycholinguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Literary Reading on Paper and Screens: Associations Between Reading Habits and Preferences and Experiencing Meaningfulness

Hakemulder,

Mangen

2024

Reading Research Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increasing use of digital technologies has implications for reading. Online and on‐screen reading often consist of engaging with multiple, short, multimedia snippets of information, whereas longform reading is in decline. Meta‐analyses have identified a screen inferiority when reading informational texts, but not narrative texts. The mode effect is explained by reference to the Shallowing Hypothesis, postulating that increased screen reading leads to a propensity to skim and scan rather than carefully read, since digital reading material is typically composed of short, decontextualized snippets of multimedia content rather than long, linear, texts. Experiments have found support for the Shallowing Hypothesis when reading expository/informational texts, but the impact of increased habituation to screens on, specifically, literary reading, is largely unknown. It is plausible that shallow modes of reading, prompted by increased screen use, may compromise one's capacity to engage deeply with literary texts and, in turn, negatively affect readers’ motivation and inclination to engage in slower, more reflective, and more effortful reading. This article presents the results from three experiments exploring associations between reading behavior, medium preferences, and the reading of a short literary text on paper versus screen. Although mixed, the results revealed an overall pattern for the role of medium: more frequent reading of short texts on screen predicted less inclination to muster the cognitive persistence required for reading a longer text, and engage in contemplation on the deeper and personally relevant meaning of the literary text. Educational implications of these findings are discussed.

show abstract

Migration, Romani Writers, and the Question of National Literature

Chirila

2023

The Palgrave Handbook of European Migration in Literature and Culture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The form of reading: Empirical studies of literariness

Cited by 81 publications

References 11 publications

The role of literariness in second language incidental vocabulary acquisition

The role of literariness in second language incidental vocabulary acquisition

Literary Reading on Paper and Screens: Associations Between Reading Habits and Preferences and Experiencing Meaningfulness

Migration, Romani Writers, and the Question of National Literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About