Startseite Engaging students in multimodal literacy practices in a university ESP context: towards understanding identity and ideology in government debates
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Engaging students in multimodal literacy practices in a university ESP context: towards understanding identity and ideology in government debates

  • Ersilia Amedea Incelli EMAIL logo
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 29. November 2021

Abstract

This paper focuses on issues of multimodal literacy practices in ESP higher education settings. In particular, the research explores how students become engaged in various literacy activities aimed at enhancing their critical-thinking skills and interpretation of images. For this purpose, two datasets consisting of video clips were extracted from a larger multimodal corpus and developed for teaching applications: one involved a UK live parliament debate and the other a US House of Representatives debate. The main objective is to identify the key verbal strategies reflecting persuasive, argumentative rhetoric and the non-verbal features accompanying these verbal utterances such as prosodic stress, body/head movements, gaze, gesture. Thus, the focus of the analysis is on how different semiotic modes of communication construct meaning, especially in terms of how they reinforce the construction of identity and ideological stance. The results were systematically categorized and applied on a practical level to a teaching unit on ‘identity and ideology’.


Corresponding author: Ersilia Amedea Incelli, Department of MEMOTEF, University of Rome La Sapienza, Rome, Italy, E-mail:

References

Baldry, A. and Thibault, P.J. (2006). A multimodal transcription and text analysis: a multimedia toolkit and coursebook. London: Equinox.Suche in Google Scholar

Bateman, J. (2008). Multimodality and genre: a foundation for the systematic analysis of multimodal documents. London: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230582323Suche in Google Scholar

Bevitori, C. (2004). Negotiating conflict: interruptions in British and Italian parliamentary debates. In: P. Bayley (Ed.), Cross-cultural perspectives on parliamentary discourse. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: Benjamins, pp. 87–109.10.1075/dapsac.10.03bevSuche in Google Scholar

Bezemer, J. and Kress, G. (2016). Multimodality, learning and communication: a social semiotic frame. London: Routledge.10.4324/9781315687537Suche in Google Scholar

Cope, B. and Kalantzis, M. (2009). A grammar of multimodality. Int. J. Learn. 16: 361–423.10.18848/1447-9494/CGP/v16i02/46137Suche in Google Scholar

Crawford Camiciottoli, B. (2015). Elaborating explanations during open courseware lectures: the interplay of verbal and non-verbal strategies. In: B. Crawford Camiciottoli, and I. Fortanet-Gómez (Eds.), Multimodal analysis in academic settings. From research to teaching. Routledge Studies in Multimodality. New York: Routledge, pp. 144–170.10.4324/9781315738758Suche in Google Scholar

Crawford Camiciottoli, B. and Bonsignori, V. (2015). The Pisa audiovisual corpus project: a multimodal approach to ESP research and teaching. ESP Today 3: 139–159.Suche in Google Scholar

Dikilitas, K. and Duvenci, A. (2009). Using popular movies in teaching oral skill. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 1: 168–172, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.031.Suche in Google Scholar

Duff, P. and Talmy, S. (2011). Second language socialization: beyond language acquisition in SLA. In: D. Atkinson (Ed.), Alternative approaches to SLA. London: Routledge, pp. 95–116.Suche in Google Scholar

ELAN (2020). The language archive, (Version 5.9). Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Available at: https://archive.mpi.nl/tla/elan.Suche in Google Scholar

Greaves, C. (2005). ConcApp 5 software, Available at: http://vlc.polyu.edu.hk/concordance.Suche in Google Scholar

Hall, E.T. (1984). The dance of life: the other dimension of time. Garden City, New York: Anchor.Suche in Google Scholar

Halliday, M.A.K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar, 2nd ed. London: Edward Arnold.Suche in Google Scholar

Jewitt, C. (Ed.) (2009). The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis. London: Routledge.Suche in Google Scholar

Kendon, A. (2004). Gesture: visible action as utterance. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9780511807572Suche in Google Scholar

Knight, D. (2011). Multimodality and active listenership: a corpus approach. London: Continuum.Suche in Google Scholar

Kress, G. and Van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: the grammar of visual design, 2nd. ed. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203619728Suche in Google Scholar

Lim, F.V., O’Halloran, K.L., Tan, S., and Marissa, K.L.E. (2015). Teaching visual texts with the multimodal analysis software. Educ. Technol. Res. Dev. 63: 915–935, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-015-9395-4.Suche in Google Scholar

Lim, F.V. and Tan, K.Y.S. (2018). Developing multimodal literacy through teaching the critical viewing of films in Singapore. J. Adolesc. Adult Literacy 62: 291–300, https://doi.org/10.1002/jaal.882.Suche in Google Scholar

Lonergan, J. (1984). Video in language teaching. New York, Sydney: CUP.Suche in Google Scholar

Machin, D. and Mayr, A. (2012). How to do critical discourse analysis: a multimodal introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Suche in Google Scholar

New London Group (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: designing social futures. Harv. Educ. Rev. 66: 60–92.10.17763/haer.66.1.17370n67v22j160uSuche in Google Scholar

O’Halloran, K.L. (2004). Multimodal discourse analysis: systemic functional perspectives. London: Continuum.Suche in Google Scholar

Partington, A. and Taylor, C. (2018). The language of Persuasion in politics. London, New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315177342Suche in Google Scholar

Prior, P. (2013). Multimodality and ESP research. In: B. Paltridge and S. Starfield (Eds.), The handbook of English for specific purposes. Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.10.1002/9781118339855.ch27Suche in Google Scholar

Querol-Julián, M. (2011). Evaluation in discussion sessions of conference paper presentation: a multimodal approach. Saarbrücken: LAP.Suche in Google Scholar

Royce, T. (2006). Intersemiotic complementarity: a framework for multimodal discourse analysis. In: T. Royce and W.L. Bowcher (Eds.), New directions in the analysis of multimodal discourse. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, pp. 63–109.Suche in Google Scholar

Sherman, J. (2003). Using authentic video in the language classroom. Cambridge: CUP.Suche in Google Scholar

Van Dijk, T.A. (2004). Text and context of parliamentary debates. In: P. Bayley (Ed.), Cross-cultural perspectives on parliamentary discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, pp. 339–372.10.1075/dapsac.10.10dijSuche in Google Scholar

Walsh, M. (2010). Multimodal literacy: what does it mean for classroom practice? Aust. J. Lang. Literacy 33: 211–223.10.1007/BF03651836Suche in Google Scholar

Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge, UK: CUP.10.1017/CBO9780511519772Suche in Google Scholar

Received: 2021-01-25
Accepted: 2021-10-22
Published Online: 2021-11-29

© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Heruntergeladen am 26.11.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/mc-2021-0004/html?lang=de
Button zum nach oben scrollen