Content uploaded by Abdessalam Chamkha
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Abdessalam Chamkha on Nov 27, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
100
The Significance of the Linguistic Approach to
Literature: Pedagogical Implications
Mr. Abdessalam Chamkha
Dr. Touria Drid
Kasdi Merbah University, Ouargla, Algeria
It's not that the speaker is trying to
be poetic, it's just that that's the
way language works.
(Steven Pinker)
Abstract
Along with other resources, literature is nowadays viewed as one of
the authentic resources in teaching foreign languages. It has been
demonstrated that using literature in English as a foreign language
(EFL) classrooms follows a variety of approaches. Since literature
appeals to many learners’ personalities and it is an obligatory module
at the Algerian tertiary level in departments majoring in English
language, this paper seeks to clarify the importance of linguistically
analyzing literary works. In addition, it aims at suggesting
implications for using this approach to literature in teaching English
as a foreign language (TEFL) for the purpose of enhancing learning.
Keywords: Language instruction, linguistic approach, literature, TEFL
101
Introduction
Literature is employed in EFL classes to bring positive results. It seems that
literature serves better in the acquisition of language, especially in interme-
diate and upper classes of English. However, it could be, in some ways,
employed at lower levels (Chen & Squires, 2011; McRae & Boardman,
1984). Even with beginners, graded readers bear a significant influence on
learning the language (Zaro Vera, 1991). For instance, a group of beginners
who are asked to act a simple play will inevitably internalize vocabulary and
memorize grammar patterns.
Nowadays, the importance of integrating literature in language
classrooms is no more questionable. This is supported by strong scholarly
justifications of incorporating literature in language classrooms over the past
decades (Brumfit, 1985; Brumfit & Carter, 1986; Carter, Goddard, Reah,
Sanger, & Bowring, 2001; Carter & McRae, 1996; Collie & Slater, 1990;
Lazar, 1993; Maley, 1989; Sage, 1987; Short, 1996). All these scholars
concluded that literature helps to enhance learner’s overall knowledge of the
language. Against this backdrop, the present paper takes their claim one step
further to clarify the significance of one approach to literature, namely the
linguistic analysis of literary works. It suggests that the linguistic analysis
enhances EFL learners in Algerian universities as well as it develops their
ability to appreciate and interpret texts on multiple levels of meaning: im-
plicatures, presuppositions, conversational markers, to mention but few.
1. Literature and its Language
Various definitions of literature have been suggested by different scholars.
Pound (as cited in Lazar 1993) sees great literature in the “language charged
with meaning to the utmost possible degree" (p. 2). This means that it is
through linguistic analysis that readers of a given literary text come to inter-
pret the multiple levels of meaning “charged” in the text. Some scholars like
102
Barthes 1978 (as cited in Lazar, ibid.) state that literary texts have no de-
finitive interpretation: “literature is the question minus the answer." It is
unrealistic to claim that literature is objective and factual. On the contrary,
literature is subjective; this is why it arouses emotions and appeals to differ-
ent people of different personalities. Defining literature is no easy task since
there is no universal definition of it; yet, it is agreed that literature means
novels, plays, poems and other fictional works that are characterized by rich
language which can be interpreted in multiple ways.
Literature uses language that deviates from the ordinary language
and other forms of discourse. It breaks language rules in all literary genres,
especially poetry (Widdowson, 1984). That is why literature is suited in
intermediate and not beginner classes: the reason is not to confuse literary
language with the ordinary one. However, if one was given extracts and
asked to distinguish the literary extracts from the non-literary ones, one
would find it a difficult task because reality caters the literary world (Lazar,
1993). Literature, of course, can be imagined and fictional, but its stones are
representations of real-world experience. Therefore, the validity of the
claim that literary language is isolated from ordinary language is questioned.
Many linguists argue that literary language is isolated from the ordi-
nary one due to the reoccurrence of some features. In spite of the occurrence
of these features in real life language, they do not occur as much as they do
in literary texts (Brumfit & Carter, 1986). For instance, metaphors, similes,
assonance, alliteration, ambiguous words and mixing of styles are character-
istics that are more frequently used in literary texts and rarely found in real
life use of language.
2. Literature in language classrooms
It is incumbent upon teachers to make a distinction between two primary
purposes of using literature in classrooms based on the end of its use.
Teaching literature for the sake of its nature is a goal that differs from using
it as a resource for teaching language (Maley, 1989). Therefore, the study of
103
literature differs from the use of literature as a resource for teaching English.
“Literary competence” is significantly crucial in the former because litera-
ture is the sole content of the course; literature by itself is the end of the
course (Culler, 2002). In the use of literature as a resource for English
teaching, literary competence is trivial because literature is a means to an
end. That is to say, literature is one among other different resources of de-
veloping learners’ language. This, of course, does not mean that teachers
should neglect the development of learners’ literary competence. Although
literature is only occasionally used, teachers are required to implicitly (and
sometimes explicitly) develop the literary competence of learners through
the exposure to literary texts. Whatever is the purpose of using literature,
whether as content or as a resource for teaching English, effective readers of
literary texts possess literary competence. The present paper is not con-
cerned with literary competence and its constituents, but with literature as a
means to teach language. In this regard, there is no harm to mention the
approaches to literature in classrooms with a focus on the linguistic-based
approach for it is the proposed argument.
3. Approaches to using literature
According to Lazar (1993), there are three main approaches to literature:
literature as content, literature for personal enrichment, and the language-
based approach.
3.1. Literature as content
This approach was traced back to be the most traditional one. The literature
itself is the content of the course. Usually, these courses are organized his-
torically or according to literary genres. Surely, this approach is successful
with learners who have a genuine interest in literature. It also proved to have
some elements that can be useful in language classrooms. Providing infor-
mation about literary texts is of vital importance where text information
entails many notions as follows:
104
Author (the notion of author biography, style of writing, and living
time)
Ideas carried in the text (political ideas, philosophical, religious,
etc.)
Reference points of the text (places, objects, etc.)
Genre of the text (short stories, novels, poems, etc.)
“Literature as content” is similar to the “Cultural Model” suggested
by Carter and Long (1991). The cultural model focuses on language as a
cultural artefact that must be investigated through social, political, literary
and historical perspectives. According to this approach, information about
the author and his or her life in the historical continuum will aid when inter-
preting literary texts. However, such information would bore a range of
learners who are not, say, literary-minded.
3.2. Literature for personal enrichment
It is famously known for its emphasis on personal experiences of the reader
(in our case the EFL learner). Experiences entail both feelings and opinions.
The approach clearly encourages the intellectual and emotional interaction
between the reader and the text. Teachers are required to select from the
vast literary works the ones that encourage personal response. To do this,
teachers may rely on their intuition of what appeals to learners based on
learners’ age, lifestyle, social position, etc. How useful this way may seem,
it is better to accompany it with a questionnaire or provide a list of topics
that learners may choose from in order to decide what appeals to them.
Having done all this, what if students are unwilling to give their responses
to the text at hand?
Pedagogically speaking, in every class there are some learners who
are unwilling to respond due to some factors, such as unfamiliarity with this
kind of education, cultural differences, personality differences, sensitivity to
105
some raised issues by the literary work and so forth. Whatever the reason is,
some techniques proved to be helpful: using group activities, pair activities
and leaving students the choice to choose their peers. Another way to en-
courage students to respond to a given text is to ask them about their expe-
riences before reading the text through the employment of cueing or brain-
storming techniques.
Again, Lazar's “literature for personal enrichment” is similar to
Carter's and Long’s the “Personal Growth Model” which aims at placing
emphasis on the learners’ own response to the literary texts including learn-
ers’ interaction, feelings, ideas and opinions. Therefore, a teacher of litera-
ture must not be a dominant know-all figure who provides his or her inter-
pretations of the text to his or her students, but the teacher must encourage
students to develop their own interpretations of a given literary text.
3.3. Language-based approach
As its name suggests, it is clear that studying literary texts is through lin-
guistic analysis. By focusing on the language of the literary text at hand,
students will improve their English, especially in terms of grammar, vo-
cabulary and the discoursal aesthetic judgments of the text. Texts are select-
ed to serve the teaching of some language elements. The approach was criti-
cized as being mechanical and demotivating. Some critics argue that this
approach is not pleasurable for there is no pleasure in analyzing texts lin-
guistically. They argue that pleasure lies in the interpretation of the text and
the interaction of the reader with the text (Lazar, 1993). This paper does not
align itself with such a claim. Linguistic analysis to literary texts is in itself
an interaction between the reader and the text. As per being mechanical, the
language-based approach can at least be considered as an objective inter-
pretation to literature. In addition, if pleasure is the main determinant of
approaching literature, this paper argues that there are different learners’ and
readers’ personalities among which those who like to linguistically analyze.
The question is whether they should be neglected.
106
Proponents of the language-based approach consider literature as a
resource for stimulating language activities. Hence, it is similar to “the Lan-
guage Model” suggested by Carter and Long (1991) which is based on the
idea that literature has a rich repertoire of linguistic features that can be
practiced in classrooms.
The three approaches are not separated from each other. They may
relate to each other depending on the different situations of teaching litera-
ture. Teachers usually use a combination of approaches or select according
to what they want to achieve. However, because literature is rarely used in
EFL classes for its own sake but used for language teaching purposes, the
paper argues that the linguistic approach should be the driving approach in
EFL classes.
4. Linguistic analysis
Linguistic analysis is an objective method of interpretation since it only
emphasizes the linguistic features of texts. Togeby (2014) divided texts into
practical texts, factual prose and literary texts. The latter are characterized
by being artistic; in this vein, literature is viewed as art put into text. The
purpose of literary texts is to entertain and amuse the readers of its different
genres: novels, short stories, plays, and poems. However, these texts are
somewhat harder to comprehend because, according to Alderson (2000),
they defamiliarize language to create special effects. Therefore, the role of
linguistic analysis is to demystify literary texts.
Linguistic analysis to literary text is not only sentence based, but a
discourse based as well. A closer examination of literary texts involves
regularity, deviance, polysemy, and other features of discourse (Parkinson &
Thomas, 2000). The use of linguistic concepts, such as “coherence”, “cohe-
sion”, “transitivity”, “under-lexicalization” and “collocation” is frequent
and referred to as foregrounding devices in literature. Foregrounding is used
as a technique to highlight the meaning of something in literature like using
a set of expressions to explain one word (e.g. “the holding thing” instead of
107
using “handle”, i.e., under-lexicalization). Linguistic analysis can be cardi-
nal even in the process of writing literature. Some writers use a “linguistic
deviation” as a device to create the desired effect on readers. For instance,
in order for a writer to project the illiteracy of one character, the writer
would misspell the speech of that character whenever the character appears
through the novel.
5. Practical implications
The main argument of this paper is that linguistic analysis of literature can
enhance learner’s ability to understand texts as well as it improves learner's
English. Take any literary texts and try to analyze it linguistically in terms
of Grice implicatures. It is difficult, especially for beginners; yet, it is help-
ful to understand the conveyed messages and it develops learners’ compe-
tency. Some argue that implicatures are more literary than linguistic. Correct
as it may seem, implicatures can be mentioned in literary metalanguage as
personification, metaphors, and so forth. Another example of linguistic
analysis that would be more suitable at lower levels is analyzing a poem
phonologically where learners can guess the pronunciation of unknown
words based on previous rhymes as well as analyzing the poem syntactically
where the same patterns of sentence reoccur in the lines of the poem. Gen-
erally, poetry is an excellent medium to learn foreign languages “because,
within the conciseness of a poem, language is utilized in the most creative
manner possible” (Xerri & Agius, 2012, p. 21).
Teachers should be careful when selecting literary texts. Many liter-
ary works deviate from the rules. Thus, exposing learners to these literary
works will confuse them. However, exposing learners at a later stage to
these works is necessary because they enable learners to think at multiple
levels of meanings. Teachers should gradually move to more complex liter-
ary text to help learners notice the sense of different forms and different
levels of meaning.
108
In order for teachers to take advantages of linguistic analysis, ac-
cording to Lazar (1993), they have to follow two steps: teachers should
notice, first, the recurring linguistic features of the text; second, they should
develop questions about them. For instance, when expressing the point of
view of a given literary work, a writer can use the expression “Adam hit
Mary” where the narrator has an objective view towards the action of hit-
ting. What if the writer has written “Adam hit his wife” or “Mary's husband
hit her”? Are they the same? Are they as objective as “Adam hit Mary”?
Which side or perspective the narrator tends to emphasize by which sen-
tence? The reason for developing these questions is to bring learners’ atten-
tion to the reoccurring features with an emphasis on whatever may deviate
from the normal use of these features.
Another example is when employing the passive or active voice to
manifest the empathy of the narrator. It is said that the passive sentence
“Mary was hit by her husband” carries the empathy of the narrator towards
Mary. Therefore, it is crucial to notice and bring learners’ attention to the
notion that linguistic forms of such sentences determine the differing inter-
pretations (Ehrlich, 2014). In other words, the linguistic analysis to “litera-
ture demonstrates for learners the importance of form in achieving specific
communicative goals” (McKay, 2001, p. 319).
Literature is a reading-centered activity. Reading is twofold: inten-
sive and extensive. Intensive reading is what teachers use in classes; it is a
closed study of shorter texts or extracts from novels or any other genres. On
the other hand, extensive reading, according to Susser and Robb (1990), is
reading long texts for pleasure and for general understanding. It is extensive
reading that leads to language acquisition, argued Krashen (1982) and
Grabe (1991). However, this is not practical in classrooms. It has been no-
ticed that some teachers expect an extensive reading of literature from the
side of their students. To be realistic, most students do not read outside the
classroom. Therefore, teachers should not build on this expectation, but they
109
have to rely on intensive reading inside the class where linguistic analysis
seems to achieve the purpose.
According to Selden, Widdowson, and Brooker (2005), Formalists
treat literature as a special language because it deviates and distorts the lan-
guage of communication. In this regard, a classroom implication for teach-
ers would be to pinpoint how the provided literary texts deviate from the
ordinary language. Its applicability is vital in classroom settings, especially
in intensive reading but always with teacher assistance (Lazar, 1993). Even
if learners read literature extensively by themselves outside the class, they
may confuse the ordinary language with the literary one. It is only when
EFL learners are provided with techniques of linguistic analysis and training
in intensive reading of literature that they can move to extensive reading by
themselves.
The final implication to linguistic analysis, in this paper, is an ac-
tivity provided by McKay (2001) who gave illustrations by employing two
short stories in classroom settings. After reading the short stories, the teach-
er may require students to elicit words, sentences, or even paragraphs that
had an influence on interpreting the text by completing a character chart
1
as
follows.
Figure 1.
The character chart
1
Mckay contributed the original chart to McKloskey and Stack (1993).
110
After completing the chart, students are required to analyze the lan-
guage of (and compare between) the two short stories. The main objective
of such an activity is to develop learners’ language competency. Activities
about tenses, language of narrating, sentence structure and other linguistic
activities exist not only in Makay (2001) but also in a range of different
books, textbooks, worksheets that are published to inform teachers about
how to propel learners’ language proficiency (Collie & Slater, 1990; Duff &
Maley, 2007; Vaughan-Rees, 2010).
Conclusion
By focusing this paper on linguistic analysis does not mean that literary
criticism or other approaches are inferior, neither the converse is true. Other
approaches and linguistic analysis of literary texts should go hand-in-hand.
However, for the purpose of improving learners’ language, the paper argues
that linguistic analysis of literature could be seen as a strategy that boosts
the ability to interpret texts. It could be seen as a strategy that enhances the
language competency of learners and helps a great deal in acquiring the
target language. Although it tends to be mechanical and reduces learners’
emotional response to literary texts, linguistic analysis, on the whole, is a
useful way of increasing learners’ knowledge of the foreign language.
Main bibliographic references
Alderson, J. C. (2000).
Assessing reading
. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Brumfit, C. (1985).
Language and literature teaching: From practice to principle
.
Oxford: Pergamon.
Brumfit, C., & Carter, R. (1986).
Literature and language teaching
. Oxford Univer-
sity Press.
Carter, R., Goddard, A., Reah, D., Sanger, K., & Bowring, M. (2001).
Working
with texts: A core book for language analysis
. London: Routledge.
Carter, R., & Long, M. N. (1991).
Teaching literature
. New York: Longman.
111
Carter, R., & McRae, J. (1996).
Language, literature and the learner: Creative
classroom practice
. Harlow: Addison Wesley Longman.
Chen, M.-L., & Squires, D. (2011). Using literature for children and adolescents for
intermediate language acquisition.
TESOL Journal
,
2
(3), 312–329.
https://doi.org/10.5054/tj.2011.259957
Collie, J., & Slater, S. (1990).
Literature in the language classroom
. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Culler, J. D. (2002).
Structuralist poetics: Structuralism, linguistics and the study of
literature
. London: Routledge Classic.
Duff, A., & Maley, A. (2007).
Literature
(2nd ed.). UK: Oxford University Press.
Ehrlich, S. L. (2014).
Point of view: A linguistic analysis of literary style
. New
York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
Grabe, W. (1991). Current developments in second language reading research.
TESOL Quarterly
,
25
(3), 375–406. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586977
Krashen, S. D. (1982).
Principles and practice in second language acquisition
. Ox-
ford: Pergamon.
Lazar, G. (1993).
Literature and language teaching: A guide for teachers and train-
ers
. Cambridge University Press.
Maley, A. (1989). Down from the pedestal: Literature as resource. In R. Carter, R.
Walker, & C. Brumfit (Eds.),
Literature and the learner: Methodological ap-
proaches, ELT document 130
. London: Modern English Publishing and The
British Council.
McKay, S. L. (2001). Literature as content for ESL/EFL. In M. Celce-Murcia
(Ed.),
Teaching English as a second or foreign language
(3rd ed., pp. 319–
332). US: Heinle & Heinle.
McRae, J., & Boardman, R. (1984).
Reading between the lines teacher’s book:
Integrated language and literature activities
. Cambridge University Press.
Parkinson, B., & Thomas, H. R. (2000).
Teaching literature in a second language
.
Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Sage, H. (1987).
Incorporating literature into ESL instruction
. NJ: Prentice Hall.
Selden, R., Widdowson, P., & Brooker, P. (2005).
A reader’s guide to contempo-
rary literary theory
. UK: Pearson Longman.
Short, M. (1996).
Exploring the language of poems, plays and prose
. London: Ad-
dison Wesley Longman.
112
Susser, B., & Robb, T. N. (1990). EFL extensive reading instruction: Research and
procedure.
JALT Publications
,
12
(2), 161–185.
Togeby, O. (2014). A model of text types and genres. In J. Engberg, C. D. Maier, &
O. Togeby (Eds.),
Reflections upon genre: Encounters between literature,
knowledge, and emerging communicative conventions
(pp. 147-176). Tü-
bingen: Narr Francke Attempto Verlag.
Vaughan-Rees, M. (2010).
Rhymes and rhythm: A poem-based course for English
pronunciation
. UK: Garnet Education.
Widdowson, H. G. (1984).
Explorations in applied linguistics 2
. Hong Kong: Ox-
ford University Press.
Xerri, D., & Agius, S. X. (2012). The use of literature in ELT.
ETAS Journal
, 18–
23.
Zaro Vera, J. J. (1991). Literature as study and resource: The purposes of English
literature teaching at university level.
Revista Alicantina de Estudios In-
gleses
, (4), 163–175. https://doi.org/10.14198/raei.1991.4.14
How to cite this article
APA (6th ed):
Chamkha, A., & Drid, T. (2019). The significance of the linguistic approach
to literature: Pedagogical implications. In H. Dahou (Ed.), Colloque
national des doctorants de troisième cycle de la faculté des lettres et
des langues: Actes du colloque (pp. 100–112). Algeria: Université
Kasdi Merbah Ouargla.
MLA (8th ed):
Chamkha, Abdessalam, and Touria Drid. “The Significance of the Linguistic
Approach to Literature: Pedagogical Implications.” Colloque
National Des Doctorants de Troisième Cycle de La Faculté Des
Lettres et Des Langues: Actes Du Colloque, edited by Houssine
Dahou, Université Kasdi Merbah Ouargla, 2019, pp. 100–12.
Elsevier – Harvard:
Chamkha, A., Drid, T., 2019. The significance of the linguistic approach to
literature: Pedagogical implications, in: Dahou, H. (Ed.), Colloque
National Des Doctorants de Troisième Cycle de La Faculté Des
Lettres et Des Langues: Actes Du Colloque. Université Kasdi
Merbah Ouargla, Algeria, pp. 100–112.
Also there is an attachment within the pdf, you can download it and extract
Metadata to use in Zotero, Mendeley, and other citation softwares
The cover and the first pages of the published book are below
Semestre 02-2019
Colloque national des
doctorants de troisième cycle
de la Faculté des Lettres et
des Langues
Université Kasdi Merbah Ouargla- Faculté des Lettres et des Langues
13 Novembre2019
Sous la direction de
Pr. Houssine DAHOU
---- ISBN :
Actes du colloque
Université Kasdi Merbah Ouargla
Faculté des Lettres et des Langues
Laboratoires de recherche scientifique
La critique et sa
terminologie
Linguistique textuelle et
analyse du discours
Le français des Ecrits
Universitaires
Colloque national des doctorants de 3e cycle
de la Faculté des Lettres et des Langues
13 novembre 2019
Éditeurs
Pr Houssine DAHOU
Comités organisateurs
Président d’honneur du colloque
Pr. Laïd Djellouli,
doyen de la Faculté des Lettres et des Langues
Président du colloque
Pr Houssine DAHOU,
vice-doyen chargé de la Post-Graduation, de la
Recherche Scientifique et des Relations Extérieures
Comité scientifique et consultatif du colloque
Président du comité scientifique
Pr Houssine DAHOU
Membres du comité scientifique
Pr. Foudil DAHOU
Pr. Salah KHENNOUR
Pr. Hajar MEDAKKEN
Pr. Ali HAMOUDINE
Dr Abdelaziz BOUSBIE
Dr Touria DRID
Dr Ahlam BENCHEIKH
Dr Hania ARIF
Dr Ahmed TIDJANI SIKEBIR
Dr Houssine ZATOT
Dr Mohammed seghir Halimi
Coordination des travaux
Pr Houssine DAHOU
Comité de rédaction
Pr. Foudil DAHOU Dr Ahlam BENCHEIKH Dr Hania ARIF
Sommaire
05
La phrase au centre de la rédaction scientifique
Le cas d'une introduction de thèse de doctorat LMD
Boulmaali Lilia Hadjer Dr. Dridi Mohamed Université de Ouargla
22
L’écrit scientifique universitaire à l’ére numérique
Kouaouci Bacher Pr. KHENNOUR Salah Université de Ouargla
36
La prise de notes Une prise de tête pour les étudiants ?
Miloud Douis Dr Massika Senoussi Université de Ouargla
59
Fostering EFL Learners Critical thinking through group discussions in
literature classrooms
Boutheyna boukhalfa Dr. Halimi Mohammed Seghir University Ouargla
70
Promoting EFL Learners’ Critical Thinking
Skills through Literature Reading
BEKHOUCHE Farida Dr. BOUSBAI Abdelaziz University Ouargla
86
The Role of Realia in Memory Enhancement
Mr. Boumaza Abdelouahab Dr. BOUSBAI Abdelaziz University Ouargla
100
The Significance of the Linguistic Approach to Literature: Pedagogical
Implications
Mr. Abdessalam Chamkha Dr. Touria Drid University Ouargla
113
Evaluating the Efficiency of (EL) Speaking Skills’ Acquisition in
EFL Classes
Mouna HEZEBRI Pr. Djamel GOUI University Ouargla
