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’.
References
Baldry, A. and Thibault, P.J. (2006). A multimodal transcription and text analysis: a multimedia toolkit and coursebook. London: Equinox.Search in Google Scholar
Bateman, J. (2008). Multimodality and genre: a foundation for the systematic analysis of multimodal documents. London: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230582323Search 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.10.03bevSearch in Google Scholar
Bezemer, J. and Kress, G. (2016). Multimodality, learning and communication: a social semiotic frame. London: Routledge.10.4324/9781315687537Search in Google Scholar
Cope, B. and Kalantzis, M. (2009). A grammar of multimodality. Int. J. Learn. 16: 361–423.10.18848/1447-9494/CGP/v16i02/46137Search 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. 144–170.10.4324/9781315738758Search 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.Search 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.Search 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.Search in Google Scholar
ELAN (2020). The language archive, (Version 5.9). Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Available at: https://archive.mpi.nl/tla/elan.Search in Google Scholar
Greaves, C. (2005). ConcApp 5 software, Available at: http://vlc.polyu.edu.hk/concordance.Search in Google Scholar
Hall, E.T. (1984). The dance of life: the other dimension of time. Garden City, New York: Anchor.Search in Google Scholar
Halliday, M.A.K. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar, 2nd ed. London: Edward Arnold.Search in Google Scholar
Jewitt, C. (Ed.) (2009). The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Kendon, A. (2004). Gesture: visible action as utterance. Cambridge: CUP.10.1017/CBO9780511807572Search in Google Scholar
Knight, D. (2011). Multimodality and active listenership: a corpus approach. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar
Kress, G. and Van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: the grammar of visual design, 2nd. ed. London: Routledge.10.4324/9780203619728Search 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.Search 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.Search in Google Scholar
Lonergan, J. (1984). Video in language teaching. New York, Sydney: CUP.Search in Google Scholar
Machin, D. and Mayr, A. (2012). How to do critical discourse analysis: a multimodal introduction. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Search in Google Scholar
New London Group (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: designing social futures. Harv. Educ. Rev. 66: 60–92.10.17763/haer.66.1.17370n67v22j160uSearch in Google Scholar
O’Halloran, K.L. (2004). Multimodal discourse analysis: systemic functional perspectives. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar
Partington, A. and Taylor, C. (2018). The language of Persuasion in politics. London, New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315177342Search 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.ch27Search in Google Scholar
Querol-Julián, M. (2011). Evaluation in discussion sessions of conference paper presentation: a multimodal approach. Saarbrücken: LAP.Search 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.Search in Google Scholar
Sherman, J. (2003). Using authentic video in the language classroom. Cambridge: CUP.Search 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.10.10dijSearch in Google Scholar
Walsh, M. (2010). Multimodal literacy: what does it mean for classroom practice? Aust. J. Lang. Literacy 33: 211–223.10.1007/BF03651836Search in Google Scholar
Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. Cambridge, UK: CUP.10.1017/CBO9780511519772Search in Google Scholar
© 2021 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Research Articles
- Towards developing multimodal literacies in the ESP classroom: methodological insights and practical applications
- Teaching communication strategies for the workplace: a multimodal framework
- Enhancing multimodal communicative competence in ESP: the case of job interviews
- Developing strategies for conceptual accessibility through multimodal literacy in the English for tourism classroom
- Engaging students in multimodal literacy practices in a university ESP context: towards understanding identity and ideology in government debates
- Growing theory for practice: empirical multimodality beyond the case study
Articles in the same Issue
- Frontmatter
- Research Articles
- Towards developing multimodal literacies in the ESP classroom: methodological insights and practical applications
- Teaching communication strategies for the workplace: a multimodal framework
- Enhancing multimodal communicative competence in ESP: the case of job interviews
- Developing strategies for conceptual accessibility through multimodal literacy in the English for tourism classroom
- Engaging students in multimodal literacy practices in a university ESP context: towards understanding identity and ideology in government debates
- Growing theory for practice: empirical multimodality beyond the case study