2015
DOI: 10.4324/9781315850900
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Discourse of Reading Groups

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
21
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
2

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
21
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Though the typology of mental structures, textualized in discourse, is not limited to discourse-world and text-world, Text World Theory, being very applicable in literary criticism and literary stylistics, has proved useful for understanding how the recipients construct mental representations as they read (Peplow et al, 2016;Whitely, 2011). In fact, contemporary Text World Theory is more focused on the receptive side of communication, that is, the analysis of the reader's experience of text rather than the writer's production of it (Trimarco, 2015).…”
Section: Underlying Conceptsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Though the typology of mental structures, textualized in discourse, is not limited to discourse-world and text-world, Text World Theory, being very applicable in literary criticism and literary stylistics, has proved useful for understanding how the recipients construct mental representations as they read (Peplow et al, 2016;Whitely, 2011). In fact, contemporary Text World Theory is more focused on the receptive side of communication, that is, the analysis of the reader's experience of text rather than the writer's production of it (Trimarco, 2015).…”
Section: Underlying Conceptsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Despite the considerable attention this theoretical premise received, the focus of much of this work centred on the hypothetical and highly theorized ‘individual reader’. This theoretical orientation was expanded to include groups of readers, and led in part to Stanley Fish’s important contributions concerning ‘communities of interpretation’—groups of readers who, through their shared experiences, converged on similar readings of texts [ 6 , 7 ]. The consideration of broad-scale responses of readers to works of fiction, however, remains understudied, not because of a lack of interest on the part of literary historians and theorists, but because of a lack of access to those readers’ responses, and a lack of methods to address this at times noisy data.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The advent of social reading sites on the Internet that allow individual readers to join in wide-ranging discussions of individual works of fiction through reader-generated reviews and comment threads on those reviews has enabled a revisiting of fundamental questions of how people respond to literary fiction [ 1 , 4 , 7 , 8 ]. Perhaps best known among these sites in the USA is Goodreads that, along with sites like it, represents an online attempt to reproduce the face-to-face space of book clubs and library groups, where there is no ‘right’ answer to reading the work (as there might be, at least implicitly, in a classroom), nor any hierarchy of critical insight (as there might be in a forum where professional reviewers or literary critics might dominate the conversation) [ 7 , 9 ]. Because these sites archive the reader reviews and the ensuing comment threads on those reviews, they offer an opportunity to explore computationally how people respond to individual works of fiction, and how they explore such a work as communities of interpretation emerge [ 4 ].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Reading therefore becomes as much a social activity as an individual one. Peplow et al (2016) adopt a socio-cognitive perspective, where they refer to the reading experience as firmly social. What they meant by this was that readers often construct their own interpretations based on social factors such as their life experiences.…”
Section: Reading Relationshipsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…What they meant by this was that readers often construct their own interpretations based on social factors such as their life experiences. Schema theory and TWT (utilised in Peplow et al (2016)) are especially useful in tracking these factors, including how and where they informed textual interpretation.…”
Section: Reading Relationshipsmentioning
confidence: 99%