Upload
mimo72
View
220
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
8/11/2019 Languge and Literature...
1/12
Articulating the Relationship between Language, Literature, and Culture: Toward a NewAgenda for Foreign Language Teaching and ResearchAuthor(s): Daniel ShanahanSource: The Modern Language Journal, Vol. 81, No. 2 (Summer, 1997), pp. 164-174
Published by: Wileyon behalf of the National Federation of Modern Language Teachers AssociationsStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/328784.
Accessed: 28/09/2014 17:36
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at.http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
WileyandNational Federation of Modern Language Teachers Associationsare collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to The Modern Language Journal.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 188.54.93.112 on Sun, 28 Sep 2014 17:36:21 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=blackhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=nfmltahttp://www.jstor.org/stable/328784?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/328784?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=nfmltahttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=black8/11/2019 Languge and Literature...
2/12
Articulating
he
Relationship
Between Language, Literature,
and
Culture:
Toward a
New
Agenda
for
Foreign Language
Teaching
and
Research
DANIEL
SHANAHAN
Departmentf nglish
Groupe EC
78351
ouy-en-Josas
France
Email:
Today,university
eachersof
foreign anguage
(FL)
in
the
U.S. face a
pedagogical
environ-
ment
in
which two
camps
have
developed,
one
basing
its
emphasis
on
communicative
competence,
the otheron
the
mportance
of
exposure
to culture
nd,
especially,
iterature.
The
reliance of
the
former
n data from
mpirical
studies often
onflictswith he
feelings
of
the latter hat
nonquantitative,
ntuitional
spects
of
language
learning
are
essential to
language
acquisition.
However,
much
research into the role of
culture and
literature
n
language
learning
remains tobe done so that hese
feelings
may
be articulated nd
applied
systematically
o the
development
f
materials,
yllabi,
nd curricula. Areas
in
which such
articulation
might
ake
place
include:
(a)
the extent o which
anguage
itself s
laden with
affect hat
may
be
catalyzed
as an inducement to
learning;
(b)
the extent to
which the
affective
lement
s
embedded
in
the
nature
of
symbolic
xpression-and
thus
metaphor,
myth,
nd
literature;
c)
the
specific
ways
n
which
language
and literature
may
encode
culture and have an affective
mpact
on
learners
n
the classroom.
Research
already
exists
that ends tself o a close examination of
these areas.
By
taking dvantage
of that
research,
FL
teaching
in
the U.S. could establish the
importance
of
literature
nd
culture
in
the
language
classroom
in
ways
that would
solidify
ts role in an environment
raught
with
transformation nd
change.
IN AN EXCEPTIONALLY THOUGHTFUL AR-
ticle
published
in the
ADFL
Bulletin
n
the
Win-
ter of
1993,
Henning
attempted
to confront
what
may
be
one of the most
pervasive
nd
yet
perennially
unresolved
dilemmas
faced
by
uni-
versity
eachers
of
foreign anguage
(FL)
in
the
U.S.
today.'
The
complexity
f this
dilemma
is
revealed
by
the
difficulty
ne has
in
stating
t
n
a
satisfactory ay.
ormulated
y management
professor,
t
mightgo something
ike
How
can
FL
departments justify offering
literature
courses
when our
students an't
speak
the
lan-
guage
well
enough
to
carry
on a routine
set
of
business
negotiations?
Formulated
by
a re-
searcher
in
applied
linguistics,
the
question
might
be
What does literature
ontribute to
language learning
when communicative
com-
petence
must
learly
e our
goal?
Expressed
by
a
member
of
a
FL
department
whose
degree
workwas
n
literarytudies,
ne
might
hear
any-
thing
from
Why
can't these
people
see that
literature
s as
central to
language learning
as
management vocabulary
and cloze tests? to
Should
I
go
on
beating my
head
against
this
TheModern
anguage
ournal,
1,
i
(1997)
0026-7902/97/164-174
$1.50/0
?1997
The
Modern
anguage
ournal
This content downloaded from 188.54.93.112 on Sun, 28 Sep 2014 17:36:21 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Languge and Literature...
3/12
Daniel Shanahan
165
wall or
take
my
brother's
offer
o
oin
his
real
estate
firm? '2
All
these
questions
are,
of
course,
over-
simplified
characterizations
of the
more
ex-
treme
positions
n
the debate
thatwe are
trying
to describe.3 However, doubt that
anyone
fa-
miliar with the debate
would
fail
to
recognize
the tendencies and biases
that each characteri-
zation
represents.
Moreover,
t is
revealing
that
all the
questions
asked
in
these
characteriza-
tions
(except,
perhaps,
for the
ast)
are rhetori-
cal,
for it is
quite
clear
that
the
debate has at
least the undercurrent
f adversarial
perspec-
tives,
well staked-out
territory,
nd,
as
is
often
the case
in
cross-disciplinary
isputes,
onflict-
ing premises.
Those
premises
will be discussed
later n this article.
Professor
Henning
(1993)
tried to address
the
problem
as an
administrator
ituated
in
a
language
and literature
department,
who is
sympathetic
o the concerns of
all
sides.
She
offered what one
might
call
a
functional-
structural
solution,
asking
what
functional
goals
we
have
for
students and what structure
will allow them
to
reach those
goals.
She also
argues,
rightly,
hatculture
must
be
woven
nto
the curriculum and that
literature
s
one fea-
ture
among
many
n
the cultural domain that
provideswhat one might all added value be-
yond
the evelof
anguage acquisition. Through
literature,
she
says,
students
can
develop
a
full
range
of
linguistic
nd
cognitive
kills,
ul-
tural
knowledge
and
sensitivity
(p.
24).
In
other
words,
her article
suggests
that
one can
offer a
curriculum that satisfies the
practical
concerns
held
by
some while
serving larger,
more
humanistically
based
purposes
at
the
same time.
The solutions
offered
n
Henning's
(1993)
ar-
ticle are
important
nes,
and
they
highlight
s-
pects of the dilemma that are all too often g-
nored
by
both sides: the
need
for
a
clearly
identifiable
et
of
functional
oals,
for
nstance,
and
the need to
recognize
the added value that
the
study
of
literature-any
literature--brings
with
t.
However,
f
there
s a
weak
point
to
Hen-
ning's
article,
it is
its failure to
confront an
underlying-and
suspect
argely
nexamined--
assumption
about
the means and ends of lan-
guage
learning,
which is
implied
in
much of
today's
discussion about the
place
of
literature
in thecurriculum.Forwhile she argues-again,
rightly-that
language
teachers should relin-
quish
their
defensive
posture
and
adopt
a more
assertive
one,
she
does not
really
challenge
or
recastthe
premise
thathas
forcedthose teach-
ers onto the defensive: he
prevalent
ttitude
n
the
U.
S. that FL
learning
s
fundamentally
n
exercise with utilitarian
i.e., career)
goals
and
that those
goals
should be the
predominating
factor n the
development
of the
language
cur-
riculum,
specially
with
regard
to methodsand
materials.4
Although
t is
rarely
tated
so
baldly
as
this,
no one in or close to the
profession
s
likely
to
disagree
that the environment sur-
rounding
the
teaching
of FL is
heavy
with
uch
reductively
tilitarian
ogic.
Henning's
article
cites several llustrations
f that
ogic
at
work:
the
fact
that
FL
texts tend
to
take
a
touristic
rather than
a
cultural
approach;
the fact that
management
and,
one should add
in
fairness,
many
other)
departments
re often at the fore-
front fdemands to increase students' commu-
nicative
skills;
the fact that it is the
changing
global
and economic situation
(not
the inher-
ent value
placed
on
language,
literature,
r cul-
ture)
that
may
allow
language
teachers to be-
come more assertive bout their
mportance.
This
last
example, especially,
underlines
the
shortcomings--let
s
say
the
incompleteness-
of
any
functional-structuralolution to the di-
lemma
faced
by
teachers
of
anguage
and litera-
ture
today. Although
it
may
be
heartening
to
see that
the climate
of
opinion
seems
to be
changing in the favorof language learning,at
least
for
the
moment,
few would
be
foolish
enough
to think that this climate
reflects
an
enhanced
appreciation
of the
importance
of
liberal
education. Nor can one
be
justified
in
thinking
hat ncreased
nterest
n
language
ac-
quisition
by
those outside the
language
teach-
ing profession
makes a
structural-functional
approach
to
pedagogy
the
best
or most
com-
plete-although
it
certainly
oes make it an im-
portant
tool
in
curriculum
development.
The
danger
of
taking
too much
comfortfrom the
favorably hangingenvironment s that t may
distract s
from
question
that s far
more cen-
tral to
our own
profession
nd to its
premises:
What
is
it
that convinces us that
iterature
has,
in
and of
tself,
omethingdeeply significant
o
contribute o the
process
of
anguage
learning,
whatever
he ultimate
goals
of
the learner
may
be,
and
how
do
we articulatethat
something
in
a
way
thatestablishes us on firm
ground
in
the
contemporary rofessional
nvironment?
Clearly,
the
problem
of
the
contemporary
professionalenvironment s a formidable one.
Not
only
do we
operate
in
a
profoundly
util-
itarian
society,
but the last 30
years
have
wit-
nessed an
explosion
in
research
into
language
learning
that s based
largely
n
nonforeign
an-
This content downloaded from 188.54.93.112 on Sun, 28 Sep 2014 17:36:21 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Languge and Literature...
4/12
166
The
Modern
anguage ournal
1
(1997)
guage teaching
(i.e.,
English
as a
second lan-
guage[ESL])
and
premised
on
the belief
that
data-based research s
the most
valid means of
developing
and
applying
a
language
teaching
rationale.
In
such an
environment,
the lan-
guage
and literature eacher
may
understanda-
bly
feel
like an alien from
another
planet
be-
cause
(a)
he
or
she believes
intuitively
n
the
value
of
iterature nd
(b)
data-based
rationales
seem
completely
napplicable
to that
ntuition.
With
respect
to the
second
of
these
points,
we
must, think,
emper any hopes
of
an
easy
rec-
onciliation of
views,
t least
in
the short
term:
Data-based research
on literature's
mpact
ust
does not seem to
work
though
this
might
ven-
tually
hange
if
we establish
firm
ground
upon
which t could be conducted),and thepremises
of the
two
camps--data-based
and
literature--
are not
ikely
o find
many
vert
points
of
agree-
ment
without further rticulationof
premises
on the
part
of the
latter.5
his
brings
me
to the
first
oint
of
my
rgument:
Although
the
itera-
ture
camp
(one
should
say,
perhaps,
iterature-
culture
camp
because
the
two,
when taken to
mean the
informingspirit'
f a whole
way
f
ife
(Williams,
1982,
p.
11),
are often
closely
inked
in
pedagogical
practice)
may
not
yet
be
able to
offer
onvincing
ata-based researchfor he
m-
portanceof literaturen the earningof a FL, I
believe that
t can do a
better,
more
comprehen-
sive,
and more
systematicob
of
explaining
the
underpinnings
of the intuitive
onviction that
literature
oes ave an
important
mpact
on de-
veloping
communicative
ompetence
n
the
an-
guage
learner.
Furthermore,
e must
not flinch
at
any
of the
implications
of that articulation
once it has been undertaken.
One of the
first
impediments
to be sur-
mounted
if
we
are to
develop
a
clearly
articu-
lated rationale
for the
impact
of literature
n
language learners s the fact that the intuitive
nature of our belief
n
the
value of iterature
or
the
anguage
learner
which
tself
prings
n
no
small
part
from the fact that much of litera-
ture's
impact
takes
place
at
a
subliminal
evel)
sometimes
spills
over
into our notions of how
that
mpact
can be articulated.
That is to
say,
n
a
utilitarian
environment,
we
feel the need to
resist
the
utilitarian
tide,
and
I
have
heard
many
a
good language
teacher
express
resis-
tance to
explaining
his or her intuitive onvic-
tion of literature'scontribution to language
learning
n
termsthat
are,
or seem to them to
be,
counterintuitive.
owever,
one
must
avoid
confusing
the issues here: The fact that intu-
itions about the
impact
of literature do not
seem at first
lance
reconcilable with
the more
empirically
based
premises
of data-based
re-
search
does not mean
that
ne
cannot
develop
a
rationale
for those
intuitive
beliefs,
even a
highly
detailed and
systematic
ne.
As
students
of iterature, e believe nthevalue of
analyzing
intuitive orms f
knowledge;
we
should not hesi-
tate to use
those same
analytical
kills o
deepen
our
understanding
of so
central an
aspect
of
our
own worldview as
literature's
mpact
on the
language
learner.
How
do
we
begin?
Where do we
uncover a
rationale n
the endless
volumes thathave
been
written
n
the nature of
iterature
nd,
if
possi-
ble,
match it
withwhat
we have learned
in
the
relatively
ecent
past
about the nature
of lan-
guage learning?I thinkwe can build on two
things:
a)
our
own
personal
encounters with
literature nd
(b)
a
gap
of
significant
ropor-
tions
in
current second
language acquisition
(SLA)
research with
respect
to
the role
of
af-
fect. Let me
address the firstof these
by
re-
counting
a
personal
experience
that,
although
it does not
specifically
reflect
the
language
learning setting,
llustrates ll the same an
im-
portant spect
of the nature of
iterary
ncoun-
ters
and,
especially,
some
of the
cultural fea-
tures
they mbody.
Shortly fter inishing raduateschool,I had
the
opportunity
o conduct a
travel-study
our
of the
People's
Republic
of China.
At
the
time,
was
involved
in
studying ideological
back-
grounds
to
literature,
specially
Marxism,
and
was anxious
to
discover what
the flavor of life
might
be like
in
a
country
where
Marxist
thought
had been institutionalized.
However,
during
the
trip
itself,
Marxism fell
into
the
background
as I
found
myself
ubmerged
n
the
East-West/North-South
ncounter that
trip
to
China
represented;
the
impact
of
the cultural
experience faroutweighedany ideological in-
sights might
have had.
Moreover,
month af-
ter
my
return,
accepted
a
year-long ulbright
fellowship
n the Dalmatian coast of
Yugoslavia,
and
very
uickly,
my
2
weeks
n
China became
a
distant,
dream-like
memory.
Five
years
later,
while
preparing
for course
on literature cross
cultures,
picked up
an
English
translation
f
Dream
of
Red
Mansions,
he classic
18th-century
Chinese
novel,
nd
began
to read the first
hap-
ter.
Suddenly,
after
only
a few
paragraphs,
I
found
myself
wash
n
the
sensationsof
my rip
5
years
before:
Here,
after o
long,
was
China,
the
mysterious,
efinitively
on-Western
ntity
that I had
experienced
so
intensely
but with
which
I had lost touch. It was
like
tasting
This content downloaded from 188.54.93.112 on Sun, 28 Sep 2014 17:36:21 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Languge and Literature...
5/12
Daniel
Shanahan
167
Proust's
madeleinewith
n almost
hallucinogenic
intensity.
et
almost
mmediately,
was
brought
up
short
by
the
logical inconsistency
f
these
sensations.
I
had visited
20th-century,
post-
Mao,
Marxist
China;
how could
an
18th-century
novelabout aristocratic hina
trigger
he flavor
of
that
experience
so
intensely?
here could
be
only
one
answer,
f
course: the
power
of
iterary
language
and the
complex coding
of
culture
that
s
embedded into t. The
language
of Dream
of
Red
Mansions-a mere half
dozen
paragraphs
in
translation6-was
acting
much like a holo-
graphic plate,
reproducing
vivid and
complex
imagery
that had been
encoded into the me-
dium
and that
lay
there dormant
until
acted
upon
by
an
appropriate
agent-namely,
the
reader.7
This
episode
will
appear
to
some as a
digres-
sion
into
unverifiable
subjective
experience,
and
I
fear that
have little o
say
thatwill refute
such
objections,
at least on their
own terms.
However,
nyone
who has
enjoyed
iterature
will
understand that
(a)
literature s a
powerful
ve-
hicle for
ll kindsof
evocative
material,
b)
that
material is
released
in
a
moment
of
catharsis
when the
reader
is
exposed
to
it,
and
(c)
much
literature arries
with t
strong
undercurrents
of the time
and
place
in
which t
was
written--
undercurrents hathave ust as muchemotional
impact
when
they
re
released
as
do such fea-
tures of
literary
roduction
as
character,
truc-
ture,
pacing,
and the ike.
No one
who has
genu-
inely
exposed
himselfor
herself to a
work
by
Dickens can claim
to be a
stranger
o
the world
of
19th-century
ritain;
no
one who has
read
Dante can
visit
contemporary taly
without a
sense of
deja
vu.
These are
aspects
of
the
study
of
literature hat
we take for
granted.
However,
because
they
nvolve
experience
that s
heavily
laden
with
emotion-- affect
n
psychological
parlance-and because that may make them
suspect
when
scrutinized
in
a
formalisticre-
search
setting,
we oftenfail
to see
themfor
what
they
re:
data
-albeit of
a different
ind
than
the
word
normally
mplies-that
is,
clear evi-
dence
that here s
a
feature f the
iterary
xpe-
rience
that
goes beyond
aesthetics,
t least n
its
more
narrowly
defined
sense.
Most
language
teachers
who
have been
trained
in
literature
feel
that this
data
reflects hefact that
itera-
ture
represents
means of
powerfully
nergiz-
ing the learningof language.
Let us
shift or a
moment to
the
question
of
data-based
research in SLA.
Research in
ap-
plied
linguistics
has
experienced
an
exponen-
tial
leap
during
the
last 30
years,
thanks to
which we
now know much more about the lan-
guage learning
process
and
are much
better
able to
prepare
teachersof
anguage
to do
their
jobs
well.
However,
when one
surveys
he
land-
scape
of
language pedagogy through
examina-
tion of such features s textbooks
designed
for
teacher
training
programs
in
language
study,
one is struck
by
a
glaringgap
in research
about
the
extent o which the affective ide of the an-
guage
learning xperience may
be an
inducement
to the
learner's success. It is true that such
methods
as
Suggestopaedia
and the Silent
Way
play
to a
greater
or lesser extenton
the
positive
emotional
aspects
of the
learning process,
but
they
re not
infrequently elegated
to the
mar-
gins
of SLA
theory:
A
glance
at the index
of
almostanycontemporaryextfor teachertrain-
ing
under affect
r
emotion
reveals
entries
such
as affective ilter 8
r emotional
blocks
to
learning.
In other
words,
there s a
strong
tendency
to see the affective
ide of
language
learning primarily
as an
obstacle,9
and
one
finds almost
no
discussion
of how
language
it-
self
may
be laden
with ffect hat
can be
turned
to the learner's
advantage.
Yet the affective
lement of
language
clearly
has a
profound bility
o
engage
us,
to
motivate
us,
even to
move us
deeply.
We are
riveted
by
certain kinds of utterances: a Martin Luther
King
booming
Free at
last,
free
at
last,
a
Robin
Williams
manically
spewing
out
free-
association
one-liners,
or a Richard
Burton
intoning
Burgen
and
water
..
burgen
and
wa-
ter.
Such
utterances
ombine music
and mean-
ing,
sound and
sense,
to
draw us into
language
and
may
be
every
it as
strong
n
their
mpact
s
any
resistances
associated with
producing
speech.
Language
is
one of
the means
by
which
we
engage
in
those
most
human of
activities,
expression,
and
communication;
these
activ-
ities,
by
virtueof the factthat
they
re human,
contain
affective
lements,
whether
hey
re un-
dertaken
n our
native
anguage
or
in
another
tongue.
However,
current SLA
theory,
particularly
theory
that
springs
from
data-based
research,
rarely
ngages
the
question
of
how the
positive
featuresof
linguistic
ffect
may
be
brought
to
bear on
language learning.
There
is,
to be
sure,
no fault n
the fact:
Applied
linguistics,
y
its
very
name,
implies
attention
paid
to the
practi-
cal aspects of language. Learning is one of
them,
and
resistance to
language
learning
looms
large
on
the
landscape, especially
n the
American
environment.
Whatever the
vehicle,
the
squeaky
wheels
tend to
attractmore atten-
This content downloaded from 188.54.93.112 on Sun, 28 Sep 2014 17:36:21 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Languge and Literature...
6/12
168
The
Modern
anguage
ournal
1
1997)
tion than
those that
pin
effortlessly,
nd thus t
is
only
naturalthat
he earner's
resistances
eap
to
the
forefrontof
the
researcher's field of
vision.
Practical
obstacles to
language
learning,
how-
ever,
representonly
halfthe
story
f the affec-
tive
aspects
of
the
earning process,
as
research
into first
anguage
acquisition
is
beginning
to
show
e.g.,
Ochs, 1986; Locke,
1995).
We need
to
knowmuch more about how to invoke
he
affec-
tivedomain as an
inducement o
learning, spe-
cially
with
espect
to the
ways
n
whichthe affec-
tive
oading
inherent
n
language
can be
turned
to the
earner's
advantage.
There is a
need
for
close and
systematic
ook at this
side of
lan-
guage learning
and for the
development
of
a
model that would help us betterunderstand
how
t
works.
Moreover,
would
argue
that
uch
research,
when combined
with
a
systematic
r-
ticulationof some of
the ntuitive eliefsof an-
guage
teachers whose
background
is
in
litera-
ture
and
culture,
ould form he basis of a
new
agenda
for
xamining
the
relationship
between
language
learning,
iterature,
nd culture. The
premises upon
which such
an
initiative
would
be
based are
quite
simple:
1.
There
is
a clear
gap
in
current LA
theory
and research about the affective eatures f an-
guage itself and the ways n which those fea-
tures
might
ecome an inducement o
language
learning.
2.
Literature
s one of
the
formsof
language
that
most
calculatingly lays upon
affect s an
inducement
to communication.
3. The cultural features
of
literature
repre-
sent a
powerful merging
of
language,
affect,
and intercultural ncounters nd often
provide
the
exposure
to
living
anguage
that
a FL
stu-
dent lacks.
We
have,
in
reverse
order,
discussed the first
two of these items; et's look at the thirdfor a
moment.
n
Contextnd Culturen
Language
Teach-
ing,
Kramsch
(1993)
has
masterfully
aid out
some
of the
questions surrounding
he
ways
n
which
one
deals with
the cultural and
literary
interface
n
the
teaching
of FL.
Among
her
mostvaluable constructs
s
the notion
of
third
places -a
kind of neutral
ground
that the
learner
must discover for him or herself
in
order to arbitrate etween the familiarworldof
the native
tongue
and thenewworld of the
FL
(chap. 8). This notion of thirdplaces illus-
tratesa
pivot upon
which the
relationship
of
affect nd cultureturn.
magine,
for
moment,
that
anguages
and
the cultureswithwhich
they
are associated are
planets,
each with a
gravita-
tional
pull.
A
learner s a
kind of
space
traveler
attempting
o move from
Planet A-his or her
own native
language
and culture-to
Planet
B-a
second or
foreign
anguage
and
culture.
The
gravitational
ull
of
the home
planet,
A,
is
one of the
many
ffective esistances hatmake
liftoff nd
planet escape
difficult.
How-
ever,
as
the motion
of the
tides
on
the
earth
demonstrates,
other
planetary
bodies exert
their
gravitational
influence
even
before
a
space
traveler
mbarks,
nd that
nfluence will
draw
the traveler
towards Planet
B
from the
outset,
with
ncreasing
force as the final
desti-
nation
is
neared. In
the case of
many
FL
learners,
Kramsch's third
places might
be
seen as
reflecting
he
period
during
the
our-
neywhen thegravitational ull of Planet B be-
gins
to
become
dominant,
but at which
point
the
learner
begins
to become conscious
of
the
differing
eaturesof
Planet
B's
gravity.
t this
stage,
the
pull
of Planet
B is
potentially
much
greater
than that
of
Planet
A
and
can
greatly
facilitate
the
passage
across
the
space
that re-
mains.
However,
t the same
time,
the
new
and
perhaps
very
istinct eatures
f
Planet B's
grav-
itational
pull begin
to
become
apparent,
and
the
travelermust
begin
to
negotiate
the differ-
ences
between
A
and
B
in a
whole
variety
of
ways:Planet B's relativemass may be smaller
than
thatof Planet
A,
its
densitymay
be
greater,
its
magnetic poles
may
be
reversed,
nd it
may
or
may
not
rotateon an axis. All of these factors
may
nfluence the nature of Planet
B's
gravita-
tional
pull,
and those
who
attempt
o
inhabit
ts
surfacemust earn to
adjust
to
these nfluences.
Language
teacherswho believe
intuitively
n
the
power
of literature o influence
language
learning
have tended to do
so
on the
basis of
their wn travels cross
anguages
and
cultures,
many
of
which
may
have
been
undertaken be-
cause of
necessity,
atural
gifts,
barnstorming
style,
or coincidence
of
personal
history.
We
have made
our
voyages
and
discovered
in
the
process-as
I
did
in
my
xperience
withDream
f
Red
Mansions--that
iterature
s an instrument
that
gives
us
powerful readings
about the
na-
ture of the
gravitational
ield(s)
that we have
encountered
or will encounter.10
owever,
f
we
are tomake
the
most of
the
personal
discovery
that iterature s one
form of
very
valuable
in-
strumentation
on these
voyages,
we need
to
know muchmore about thephysics f cultural
and
linguisticgravitational
ull
and the
way
n
which literature
helps
us to read it. Further-
more,
we
especially
need to know much more
about the
way
n
which the
gravitational
ull
of
This content downloaded from 188.54.93.112 on Sun, 28 Sep 2014 17:36:21 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Languge and Literature...
7/12
Daniel Shanahan
169
our students' destinations
an be used to
make
their
voyage
easier and more
productive.
Work
done
by
Kramsch
(1993)
and
others
has
greatly
nhanced our
appreciation
of
how
certain
parts
of the
voyage may
be facilitated
y
increased awarenessof the features f the desti-
nation culture
and
their relation to
language
learning,
llowing
us to focus on such
elements
of
interculturalencounters as
resistance,
the
need for olerance of
ambiguity,
nd a
compara-
tive
approach
to
values and mores.
However,
we
lack an
interpretive
ramework hatwill allow us
to
map
out
systematically
uch
questions
as
what
the affectivenature of
language
is,
how
language
allows literature o
capitalize
on the
affective,
ow literature
mpacts
the
language
learner,how that mpactcarriesculturalcoding
along
with
ffective
mpact,
nd so
on.
In
other
words,
we
need
an
initiative hat
will allow us
to
learn
much more about
affect,
anguage,
litera-
ture,
nd culture
nd to use the
findings
ained
therein o
enhance the
anguage
learningexpe-
rience.
Specialists
n
a
variety
f
related
fieldswill be
more
qualified
than to
identify
hich
specific
areas of current
research
in
first,
econd,
and
foreign
language
acquisition,
discourse anal-
ysis,
iterary
heory
nd
criticism,
ross-cultural
communication and anthropology-to name
only
the
most obvious
related
fields-should
play
a role in
the kind of
initiative
being
pro-
posed
here.
Moreover,
think
we mustbe
aware
of what
Langer
(1957)
calls
the obstacle of
too
much
nowledge,
hat
s,
the
nability
o assemble
an
overview
by
virtue of
the
so-called 'find-
ings'
of
specialists
n
other
fields,
findings'
hat
were
not
made with
reference to
our search-
ings,
and often
eave the
things
that
would be
most
mportant
or
us,
unfound
(p.
218).
How-
ever,
f
the
ultimate
goal
is
kept
in
mind-the
need to develop a systematic ationale forthe
intuitive
aith
hat
many
of
us
place
in
the
value
of
literature n
the
language
learning
experi-
ence-it
should be
possible
to
distill
the infor-
mation
that
we
need from
he
myriad
ources at
our
disposal
and to
construct hat
ratidnale.
There
are several
areas
that seem
to
require
close
examination.
First,
here s
much
work to
be
done,
even at
the
epistemological
level,
about the
relationship
between
affect nd lan-
guage.
Because of
language's
unique
role as
a
vehicle forhigher cognitive functions,which
also
makes it the
ideal medium
through
which
to
viewsome of
those
functions,
discussion of
language
tends to
focus on the
cognitive.
As we
have
seen,
this s
no less
true of the discussion
of
language learning.
However,
t is
quite
clear
that
language
has roots
deep
in the
affective
dimension
of the human
experience,12
nd
the
nature
of that
relationship
s critical to our
un-
derstanding
of the
process
of
language
learn-
ing, especially
with
respect
to the role oflitera-
ture and culture
and to the
way
n which
they
can contribute
o what
we
might
all the
affec-
tive
magnet,
that
s,
the
power
to turn
affect
into an inducement
ratherthan an obstacle to
learning.
Some of the work
currently
being
done
in first
anguage
acquisition
will
help
even
out the balance
of our interest n the
cognitive
and affective
ides of
anguage.
However,
much
remains
to be done to illuminatethe
extent to
which
the
very
nature
of
anguage
itself
s
inher-
ently aden with ffect, ven at such basic levels
as
morphology
nd the
origins
of
language.13
Moreover,
ny
discussion of
the affective
a-
ture of the interaction
between
the
language
learner and
the
iterature
f the
target
anguage
will,
by
necessity,
have to take
into
account
reader-response theory.
Space
travelers'
en-
counters with new
worlds are
made with
the
equipment
that
the travelers
ring
with
them,
and new
worlds
may
require
interpretive
ools
that not
only
measure
things differently,
ut
also measure
things
heretofore
unmeasurable.
Iflanguage teachersare to make such encoun-
ters
a
successful
part
of
the
language learning
experience, they
must be
aware not
only
that
the new worlds
may
be
strange
to
the
learner,
but that
the learner's
instrumentation
may
need
recalibration
f
he or
she is
to
understand
the new
environment
ully.
Any
attempt
o
un-
derstand
systematically
he role of
affect n
the
language
learning process
will have
to include a
detailed
examination of
the
earner's
character
and
culture
and
all
the
variables
implied
therein.14
Second, ifwe are to
probe
deeply
into the
nature of
literature's
mpact
on
the
language
learner,
we also
need to
develop
a
model that
takes us
from
anguage
throughmyth, ymbol-
ism,
and
metaphor
to the
literary
work itself.
That is
to
say,
we
need to
revivify
branch of
theoretical
discourse
that
contributedmuch to
our
understanding
f
these
elementsof
human
expression
in
the
early
and
middle
part
of
this
century,1'5
ut that seems to
have borne
little
subsequent
fruit n the
rise of
structuralistnd
postmodernist schools of literarycriticism.
There is
much to
be
gleaned
from
he
analytical
methods
hat
deal with he
question
of
symbolic
expression,
such as the
Freudian
and
Jungian
schools,
theworkof
anthropologists
uch as
Sa-
This content downloaded from 188.54.93.112 on Sun, 28 Sep 2014 17:36:21 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Languge and Literature...
8/12
170
The
Modern
anguage
ournal
1
(1997)
pir
and
Malinowski,
nd even the
structuralist
anthropologists
uch
as Levi-Strauss.
However,
we need a
unified model
that,
without
disput-
ing
the
nterpretation
f one
school
or
another,
posits
symbolic
expression
as
a
fundamentally
human characteristic and traces its
develop-
mentfrom he
emergence
of
anguage
through
the birth
of
myths,
ymbols,
nd
metaphor
to
the
literary
work. There is an
obvious intersec-
tion
here between the
analysis
of
the role of
affect
n
language
and the
development
f
such
a
model: Much of
what
myths, ymbols,
and
metaphors
do is
rooted
in
the affective
imen-
sion of the
human
experience. By
developing
a
unified model
of
how
symbolic
expression
movesfrom
anguage
to literature-and
adding
theassumptionthat, n someway, hylogenye-
capitulates ontogeny-we
establish a means
by
which we can
link
what we discover about the
affective
nature
of
language
with
the
way
in
which that affect
s
put
to work
n
the creation
of other formsof
symbolic
xpression,
uch
as
the
literary
ext.
Third,
points
one and two
are,
of
course,
only
two
legs
in a
tripod
that must
engage,
not sim-
ply
the
gravitational impact
of affect
n
lan-
guage
and artistic
expression,
but
the added
dimension
of
learning
a
FL,
which turns stu-
dents ntovoyagers cross nterculturalpace. A
working
model of the
relationship
between an-
guage
and culture that can be
applied
to
the
language
learning experience
is
absolutely
es-
sential to
any ystematic
rticulation f
the
ways
in
which
iterature
may
ontribute o that
expe-
rience. The
relationship
between
culture and
language
is a
topic
with curious and somewhat
controversial
istory
n
the
20th-century,
ue
in
no small
part
to the fact that
t is
often
associ-
ated with
the
Sapir-Whorf
nalysis,
which
has
itself
wung
n
and out
of favor
ince
t
began
to
emerge
on the
linguistic
cene overa halfcen-
tury go.16
The
notion that
anguage
is instru-
mental
in
both
creating
and
expressing
a
cul-
ture's
informing
pirit
Williams,
1982,
p.
15)
is as
old
as
Herder
and
Vico,
but
a
debate that
hovers between
cultural determinism
nd
cul-
turalrelativism
as sometimesmade it difficult
to
focus on
developing
a
model
of
how
lan-
guage
may
reflect ulture and
vice versa. How-
ever,
uch a model will
be
essential
to
anysys-
tematic
examination of the
ways
in
which
literaturemaycontribute o language learning,
and
its
development
will
require
us to
identify
more
rigorously
he
specific
discourse
strate-
gies,
from
grammatical
nuances to rhetorical
and
metaphorical
devices,
that haracterize ul-
tures where the
target
anguage
is
spoken,
as
well as those
that
may
distinguish
one
target
language
culture or
subculturefrom
nother.17
Recent
works8
n
discourse
analysis
and
sys-
temic
grammar uggests
hat he
conceptualiza-
tionsthatone needs to
develop
such a
working
model
have
begun
to
appear.
Some
of
this
work
follows
pon
Kaplan's
(1966)
seminal
Cultural
Thought
Patterns
n
Intercultural
ducation,
taking
the notion
that the rhetorical
tructure
of
languages
differs
Kaplan,
1987,
p.
9)
and
applying
it
to
a
much broader
range
of
dis-
course
strategies.
Other
researchers take
as
their
premise
the notion that
discourse
emerges
from social
context nd that such
features
s
register repertoires
are
not identical across
[language] communities (Hasan & Perrett,
1994,
p.
182):
This
approach
then
sets out to
analyze
the
variety
f
ways
n
which the
cultural
context
may
influence,
not
merely
the
values
and
perceptions
that one tries to
express,
but
the
ways
n
which
they
re
expressed,
even at
the level of
grammar
nd
syntax.
It remains
to be seen whether
r
not
the
de-
velopment
of such a
working
model-or mod-
els,
because we are
dealing
here with
n almost
infinite number
of
languages,
cultures,
and
subcultures--would
then allow
us
to
develop
a
templatewhereby ne could use a culture's in-
guistic practices
to
identify
ts salient charac-
teristics.
Anyone
who
might
squirm
at the no-
tion that
this
pproach
runs the riskof
cultural
determinism should
remember Kramsch's
(1993)
remark,
Because
of
the
multiplicity
f
meanings
nherent
n
any
stretch
f
speech
...
any
established
culture'
is
alternately
dopted
and
contested,
adapted
and
ironicized,
by
the
emergence
of
new
meanings
(p.
67).
By
devel-
oping
a
profile
of the discourse
strategies
har-
acteristicof a culture's
use
of
its
language,
we
should then be able to enter nto a discussion
about which
kindsof
iterary
exts erve
as
navi-
gational
instruments or students
s
they
make
their
inguisticvoyages
across cultures.
n the
absence of
discovering
DNA-likefeaturethat
allows us
to
identify
ultural
coding
in
litera-
ture,
a
quest perhaps
better
eft to the struc-
tural
nthropologists
or he foreseeable
future,
such
discussions
ould
be
expected
to afford
s
a much-needed
methodological
basis
upon
which both to choose
materialsfor studentsof
language and to help new teachersbringtheir
own ntuitions o
bear on the use of iteraturen
their
yllabi.
Of
course,
the use of literature
for FL stu-
dents
is,
a
priori,
imitedto the
degree
of
profi-
This content downloaded from 188.54.93.112 on Sun, 28 Sep 2014 17:36:21 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Languge and Literature...
9/12
Daniel Shanahan
171
ciency
that
they enjoy
in the
target anguage.
Even
with
model
or models of
the kind
have
described
here,
one mustdecide such
questions
as
how
much,
when,
and
which
literary
works before
reaching
the final
goal
of
syllabi
that maximize the
potential
that iteraturehas
to
offer.19
owever,
ll too
often,
the fact that
not all literature
is
accessible
to
language
learners at all
proficiency
evels
provokes
ten-
dency
to fall back on the kind of
reductively
utilitarian
ogic
mentioned at the
opening
of
this article.
f
research nto the areas described
in
this article
begins
with
the
premise
that
any
use of iteraturemustbe based on the extent o
which students' levels allow them
access to
a
literary
work,
nsights
offered
by
that research
could be correlated and combined withwhatwe
already
know
about
how culturalvalues are em-
bedded
in
such
literary
eatures
s
theme and
narrative20
nd with
many
of
the
topics
that tu-
dents
of
iteraturehave discussed for centuries:
the
power
of
magery,
he rhetoric f the work
of
art,
he
ways
n
which the affective eatures f
language qua language
resonate with the affec-
tive
anguage
and contentof
literature,
nd so
on.
One would also
hope
that these efforts
would
help
us
understand
a
great
deal more
about the
relative
potency
that
other kinds of
cultural artifacts, uch as television,popular
music,
and even commercial
advertising,might
have on
the
language
learning experience.21
What is the
likely
utcome of all of this? No
doubt therewill be some
adjusting
of
our intu-
itive
assumptions.
There remain those scholars
and
teacherswho like to think
hat iterature s
nothing
ess than the
epitome
of
linguistic
x-
pression
and
thatwe should
be asked to do
no
more than
expose
studentsto the
pinnacles
of
language
and civilizationthat
iterature
epre-
sents. As one
who would be
happy
to live a life
in deep contemplationof great literaryworks
with
engaged
students,
have no doubt that
such
expectations
and the
attitudes
hey
epre-
sent must be
balanced
by
realistic assessments
of
how
literature and
communicative
compe-
tence
complement
ne
another;
a
systematic
e-
view of the
premises upon
which we base
our
belief
n
literature's
alue
in
the
anguage
learn-
ing
classroom
will,
no
doubt,
forceus to
temper
our
grandest
dreams a bit.
Our
fundamental
goal
as
language
profes-
sionals is to expand and enrich the livesof our
students
nd the
society
n
which
they
ive. Our
dedication to that
goal,
both at the
personal
and
professional
evels,
has
sustained our com-
mitment o
humanistic
study
even
when it ex-
ists,
s is so often he
case,
on a
bleaklyunrecep-
tive
landscape.
However,
our dedication
and
commitment ave not
yet
been
complemented
with
a
systematic
ationalethatwould allow
us,
not
only
to
defend
ourselves
against
those
who
harbor the
suspicion
that the humanitiesare
archaic and
soft,
but to understand
more
fully
he
advantages
that our
perspective
ffers
and to use those
advantages
to
accomplish
our
goals
more
completely.
Some
empirically
minded,
data-based re-
searchers
truly
nderstand he
benefits f
ntu-
itive
thought
and
recognize
that one cannot
have
quality
science without ntuition
nd
sys-
tem
in
a
complementary elationship.22
n
the
humanities,
here s no less need for
uch
a bal-
ance; nothingis likelyto contribute more to
research into
language learning
today
than
a
deeper,
more
systematic
nderstanding
fhow
literature and culture can contribute to
the
learning
of
FL. There is
every
reason to
believe
that such an examination of our
intuitions
will
confirm
many
of
them,
strengthen
ome,
and
eliminate a
few
o
be sure.
However,
n
the
end,
this
process
will
provide
us with both a
vastly
more effective nd
satisfying
et
of tools for
do-
ing
the work that
we have chosen and a
great
measure
of
the self-assurance nd the
respect
from other colleagues that any professional
wants and needs. To
paraphrase Henning
(1993),
articulating
the
premises
upon
which
foreign
language
and
literature
teaching
and
research are conducted is
a task that
only
for-
eign
language
and
literature eachers and re-
searchers an
accomplish.
They
face,
t s
true,
profoundly
difficult
nvironment
n
which to
operate.
However,
by
taking
the initiative nd
establishing
he
foundations or
solid and suc-
cessful
educational
edifice,
they
not
only
shed
an
unnecessary
defensiveness,
ut
may
actually
achieve an uncommonconsistencynd reliabil-
ity
n
an
educational
environment
raught
with
transformation
nd
change.
NOTES
1
Special
hanks or
heir
elp
n
the
preparation
f
this
rticle
o
to Richard
Kern,
homas
Miller,
nd
Anthony
lark.
The author
would
also like
to ac-
knowledge
he
Groupe
HEC
Faculty
esearch ro-
gram or hefinancialssistancetprovided oward
conducting
ibliographical
ork
elated
o the
opics
discussed erein.
2
The
discussion f
iterature'sole n
theFL class-
room
s
not new ne.
Some
of
he
verriding
hemes
This content downloaded from 188.54.93.112 on Sun, 28 Sep 2014 17:36:21 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Languge and Literature...
10/12
172
TheModern
anguage
ournal
1
(1997)
of
the
discussion
appear
in
Povey
(1972),
Seelye
(1976),
Marckwardt
1978),
Widdowson
(1982, 1990),
and
Kramsch
(1993).
3
Moreover,
he ssues discussed
herein are
affected
by
a
variety
f other
factors,
uch
as administrative
structures nd prerogatives,proficiency tandards,
intercultural
erspectives
n
literacy
nd the role
of
the
text,
and
power
relationships
in
multilingual
contexts-each
of
which deserves
an extended dis-
cussion
of
its
own not
possible
in an
article-length
treatment.
he contrasts
hat
exist between the
two
camps
that are
examined
here
have been
chosen be-
cause
theyhighlight
n
ambiguity
n
the
perspective
of one
camp.
Resolution
of that
ambiguity
ould,
I
believe,
greatly improve
the
efforts
of
language
teachers
and
learners.
Having
taken
that
step,
it
would
still
remain
necessary
to
study
the
points
of
intersection
etween
the use
of iterature
nd culture
in language learning nd themanyrelated ssuesthat
concern
language
teaching professionals.
4 For
a
program
rationale that
ncludes
career
ob-
jectives
but
emphasizes
a number
of ntermediate
ac-
tors
n
the
ogic
of ts
design,
see Shanahan
(1993,
pp.
23-24).
5
The tension
between
qualitative
nd
quantitative
perspectives
s,
in
many
respects,
reflection
of the
contrast
between
the
two
modes
of
thought
dis-
cussed
in
Bruner
(1986).
6
I
am
aware that
the
problems
that
exist
in
the
translation
of literature
are formidable
and even
greaterfor ny generalization
one
might
make about
the
cultural
resonances
that
translated
iterature
may
produce.
Steiner
1992)
has addressed
many
of
these
problems,
s
has Barnstone
1993).
However,
do
not
believe
the
fact
hat
was
reading
a translation
imin-
ishes the
validity
f
the
experience.
If
this
translation
was able
to act
as a
potent
cultural
carrier
despite
the
attendant
problems
of lexical
correspondences
between
anguages,
stylistic
trategies,
one,
and
pac-
ing,
it
supports
the
idea
that there
s
great
residual
power
n the
way
iterature
ncodes
culture's
ffective
features.
7 The
possibility
hat the
formation
f a
hologram
directly arallels theway n whichmemory s stored
and
recalled
has been
extensively xplored
by
neuro-
psychologist
Karl
Pribram
(1971).
Anthropologist
Francis
L. K. Hsu
(1983)
offers
n
interesting
nter-
pretation
of the
differences
between
Chinese
and
Western
fiction,
ncluding
Dream
f
Red
Mansions,
ut
does
not
discuss
language per
se.
8
A
term
formulated
y Dulay
and
Burt
(1977).
9 Another
exception
to be
mentioned
s discussion
of
learner
motivation,
which
may
be
instrumen-
tal
(emanate
from
occupational
needs)
or
integra-
tive
(reflect
desire to
enter nto
the culture
of
the
target language
group),
or
both; see,
for
example,
Schumann (1975) or Brown (1987). This has been a
fruitful
rea
of
research; however,
t focuses
on affec-
tive
contingencies
of the learner
and his or
her
spe-
cific
situation,
not
on how
language
itself
may
be
affect-laden.
10
Obviously,
here are
limitsto the
gravitational
pull
metaphor,
and it
begins
to break down
here:
Literature s much
more than
an instrumentmanu-
factured
for
data
read-out.
It
might
be better
com-
pared
to
Superman's
nemesis,
kryptonite : piece
of theplanet towardswhich we are moving, harged
withfeatures f that
planet's
magneticfield-except,
of
course,
with the
power
to enhance
our
ability
o
adjust,
rather han to diminish
t.
11
See,
for
xample,
Widdowson
1990),
Valez
(1986),
Nostrand
1988),
and
Brogger
(1992).
12
See,
for
example,
Cassirer
(1946),
Sapir
(1921),
and Malinowski
1927).
See
also Shanahan
(1995)
and
Ochs
(1986).
13
The
notion
that
morphology
ould
contain
affec-
tive
elements
may
violate the
current
notion that
there
s no
inherent
relationship
between
individual
words
and what
they
name,
but
I
must
confess
that
have neverbeen entirely atisfiedwiththe descrip-
tion
of the
relationship
between
words and
what
they
represent
s
arbitrary-at
least
in
any
absolute
way.
Onomatopoeia
may only
account
for a minuscule
number
of
words
in
any language,
but
it is hard
to
imagine
the
emergence
of
language
or
even
proto-
language
(see
Bickerton,
990)
without
ome
form f
the human
experience
of the
thing
having
been
projected
into its
naming.
Pinker
1994)
implies
this
in
his discussion
of
phonetic
symbolism p.
167),
and
it seems
implicit
n what Cassirer
(1946)
says
about
the
origins
of
anguage.
Of
course,
f
anguage
did,
in
its
emerging phases,
have
some
logic
based
on the
relationship
between
perceiver
and
perceived,
that
logic
may
have
long
ago
been buried
under
ages
of
symbolic
transformation,
ome
of
that
quite
genu-
inely
arbitrary.
However,
to
cite
a
parallel
case,
though
the
anatomy
of
primitive
protozoans
may
have
only
the
most distant
of
relationships
to
our
own,
no
respectable
anatomist
could
go
about
his
or
her
daily
work
without
cknowledging
he
biological
links that exist
between
us
and them.
think here
s
room
for the
same
kind
of
acknowledgement
n
our
own attitudes
towards
anguage,
both
in
its earliest
forms
nd
in
the
form
we
know
today.
14
Rosenblatt's 1995) long-lived tudy
f the
mpor-
tance
of the
reader
in
the
teaching
of literature
e-
mains
a benchmark
in
reader-response
criticism;
chapter
8,
Emotion
and
Reason,
is
especially
ppli-
cable to
the
question
of how
learners
must
cross
boundaries
that
take
them
beyond
the
confines
of
their
wn
cultural
onstructs.
or other
discussions
of
reader-response
heory,
ee
Iser
(1978),
Fish
(1980),
and Scholes's
(1985)
critique
of
Fish.
15
am
thinking
here,
for
example,
of the
work
of
Cassirer
1946),
Langer
(1957),
and Burke
(1957),
and
also of
parallel
work
done
in
other
disciplines
by
an-
thropologists,
ociologists,
nd
psychologists.
or
the
latter, ee Part4 ofParsons, Shils,Naegele, and Pitts
(1961).
16
Hoijer (1988)
views
Sapir-Whorf
uite positively;
Pinker
(1994)
almost
dismisses
Whorf
out
of
hand;
Montgomery
1986)
tries
o take
a balanced
approach.
This content downloaded from 188.54.93.112 on Sun, 28 Sep 2014 17:36:21 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Languge and Literature...
11/12
Daniel
Shanahan 173
17
For
example,
British
English
and American
English
differ
ufficiently
o
that one would almost
never
try
o use a
literary
ext rom
ne to
amplify
he
learning
of
the
other,
xcept
perhaps
by way
of
con-
trast.Yet at
the same
time,
one would almost
certainly
expect to findsimilaritiesbetween them that reveal
common differences
from,
say,
the cultures
where
French
s
spoken.
At
an even
deeper
level of
compara-
tive
analysis,
t would be
interesting
o see
how
Cana-
dian
francophone
iterature,
y
virtue
f
ts
proximity
to
anglophone
North American
cultures,
might
re-
veal tendencies that
one would not find
n
continen-
tal French iterature.
18
See Purves
(1988),
Kramsch
(1993,
chap.
2),
and
Brogger
1992).
Hassan and Perret
1994)
and Martin
(1989)
represent examples
of
comparative
analyses
that
have a base
in
systemic rammar.
Bruner
(1986)
provides
an
interesting
omparative
analysis
of
two
texts, one scientific and the other literary,using
Todorov's
(1978)
transformations
as a means of
drawing
out
differences
etween
the scientific
rgu-
ment and the
literary
arrative. t would be interest-
ing
to
see whether
or
not
such
an
analysis
might
be
done of
literary
exts
across
languages
to tease out
characteristic ultural
differences.
19
For an
attempt
to answer some of
these
ques-
tions,
see Shanahan
(1987).
It is worth
remarking
n
this
context hat
most
teachers
of literature eal with
relatively
dvanced
students,
nd thatthe
ion's share
of SLA and ESL research focuses on earlier
phases
of
the
language learning
experience;
this
has,
in
my
x-
perience, contributed ignificantlyo thedifficulties
experienced
when the two
camps
try
to talk
to
one
another.
20
See Kramsch
1993),
especially
chapter
5. Merrill
(1985)
cites several studies
of how
narrative sche-
mata are
culture-specific,
namely
Carell
(1983),
Johnson
(1981),
and
Steffensen nd
Joag-dev
1984).
Kramsch
(1993)
cites
further
esearch
on the
same
topic (p.
124).
21
My
own
experience
is that these kinds of mate-
rials,
and others ike
them,
have
great
usefulness,
s-
pecially
with
young
learners.
However,
I
fear
that
some texts
verplay
his
ard,
trivializing
he
earning
of
anguage
in their
ttempts
omake it real-world.
Moreover,
he
homogenization
of
popular
culture
n
the
contemporary
lobal
environment
may
render t
increasingly
ifficult
o
make
cross-culturaldistinc-
tions between
popular
cultural formsfrom
different
societies. See
Barber
(1995).
22
As Bateson
(1988)
says,
rigor
and
imagination
[are]
the two
great
contraries of
mental
process,
ei-
ther of which s
by
tself
ethal
(p.
237).
REFERENCES
Barber,
B.
(1995).
fihad
vs.
McWorld. ew York:
Times
Books.
Barnstone,
W.
(1993).
The
poetics
f
translation:
istory,
theory
nd
practice.
ew
Haven,
CT:
Yale
Univer-
sity
Press.
Bateson,
G.
(1988).
Mind and
nature:
necessary
nity.
New York: Bantam.
Bickerton,
D.
(1990).
Language
and
species.
hicago:
UniversityfChicago Press.
Brogger,
F.
(1992).
Culture,
anguage,
ext:
ulture
tudies
within he
tudy fEnglish
s a
foreign
anguage.
Oslo,
Norway:
Scandinavian
University
ress.
Brown,
H.
D.
(1987).
Principles
f anguage earning
nd
teaching
2nd ed.).
Englewood
Cliffs,
NJ:
Pren-
tice Hall.
Bruner,
J.
(1986).
Actual
minds,
ossible
worlds.
am-
bridge,
MA: Harvard
University
ress.
Burke,
K.
(1957).
The
philosophy
f iteraryorm.
New
York:
Vintage.
Carrell,
P.
L.
(1983).
Background knowledge
n
sec-
ond
language comprehension.Language
earn-
ing
nd Communication
,
25-33.
Cassirer,
E.
(1946).
Language
and
myth.
S.
Langer,
Trans.).
New York: Dover.
Dulay,
H.,
&
Burt,
M.
(1977).
Remarkson
creativity
n
language acquisition.
In
M.
Burt,
H.
Dulay,
&
M. Finnochiaro
(Eds.),
Viewpoints
n
English
s
a
Second
anguage
pp.
95-126).
New
York:
Regents.
Fish,
S.
(1980).
Is
there text n
this
lass?
Cambridge,
MA: Harvard
University
ress.
Hasan,
R.,
&
Perrett,
G.
(1994).
Learning
to
function
with the other
tongue:
A
systemic
functional
perspective
on
second
language teaching.
In
Terence Odlin (Ed.), Perspectivesnpedagogical
grammar
pp.
179-226).
Cambridge:
Cambridge
University
ress.
Henning,
S.
D.
(1993).
Integration
f
anguage,
litera-
ture and
culture: Goals
and
curricular
design.
ADFL
Bulletin, 4,
22-29.
Hoijer,
H.
(1988).
The
Sapir-Whorf ypothesis.
n
L.
Samovar &
R.
Porter
Eds.),
Intercultural
ommu-
nication:
A
reader
5th
ed.,
pp.
225-232).
Bel-
mont,
CA: Wadsworth.
Hsu,
E
L.
K.
(1983).
Mirrors f life.
In
E
Hsu
(Ed.),
Rugged
ndividualism econsidered
pp.
176-196).
Knoxville,
TN:
University
f
Tennessee
Press.
Iser,W. (1978). The ctof eading.altimore,MD: Johns
Hopkins
University
ress.
Kaplan,
R.
(1966).
Cultural
thought
patterns
n
inter-
cultural
education.
Language earning
16,
1-20.
Kaplan,
R.
(1985).
Cultural
thought
patterns
revis-
ited.
In
U. Connor
& R.
B.
Kaplan
(Eds.),
Writ-
ing
cross
anguages: nalysis f
L2
text
pp.
9-22).
Reading,
MA:
Addison-Wesley.
Kramsch,
C.
(1993).
Context
nd
culture
n
anguage
each-
ing.
Oxford:
Oxford
University
ress.
Johnson,
P.
(1981).
Effects n
reading
comprehension
of
building
background knowledge.
TESOL
Quarterly,
6,
503-516.
Langer, S. (1957). Philosophyn a newkey 3rd ed.).
Cambridge,
MA:
Harvard
University
ress.
Levi-Strauss,
C.
(1967).
Structural
nthropology.C.
Jacobson
&
B.
Schoepf,
Trans.).
Garden
City,
NY:
Anchor.
This content downloaded from 188.54.93.112 on Sun, 28 Sep 2014 17:36:21 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp8/11/2019 Languge and Literature...
12/12
174 The Modern
Language Journal
81
(1997)
Locke,
J.
L.
(1995).
Development
of the
capacity
for
spoken
language.
In
P. Fletcher& B. MacWhin-
ney
(Eds.),
Thehandbook
or
poken
anguage
pp.
279-302).
London: Blackwell.
Malinowski,
B.
(1927).
The
problem
of
meaning
in
primitive anguages. In C. K. Ogden & I. A.
Richards
Eds.),
The
meaningf
meaning:
study
f
the
nfluence
f
anguage
pon hought
nd
of
he ci-
ence
of symbolism
2nd
ed.,
pp.
296-336).
New
York:
Harcourt,
Brace.
Marckwardt,
.
(1978).
The
lace
of
iterature
n the
each-
ing
of nglish
s a second
anguage.
onolulu,
HI:
University
f Hawaii
Press.
Martin,
J.
(1989).
Factual
writing:
xploring
nd
challeng-
ing
ocial
eality.
xford,
Oxford
University
ress.
Merrill,
A.
(1985).
Language
charged
with mean-
ing : Incorporating