Organizers:
- Prof. Dr. Arthur M. Jacobs and Dr. Jana Lüdtke (Freie University Berlin)
- Prof. Dr. Gerhard Lauer (University of Basel/University of Mainz)
Duration:
The workshop will consist of two days of online meetings (three two-hour meetings per day), for a total of 12 hours of attendance plus 48 hours of personal study.
Objectives: The aim of the workshop is to interrelate two perspectives on empirical research on literary reading
(1) A central assumption of many (if not all) disciplines in the humanities is that style matters: the way content is presented determines to a large extent how it is perceived and what the effects may be on recipients. The workshop focuses on one particular category of stylistic qualities, that is, those aspects of a text that seem to deviate from ‘normal’ modes of representations; these deviating style figures are called “foregrounding” and are often considered a criterion for degree of literariness.
(2) After a short introduction into the general principles of (neuro)-cognitive modelling, participants of the workshop will be guided on the way to construct testable hypotheses about the influence of foregrounding features on affective-aesthetic processes. Moreover, based on current models from the field of neurocognitive poetics, the participants learn quantitative and qualitative methods to describe foregrounding features of stimuli used in empirical research on literary reading and explore ways to combine them with methods of the social sciences (e.g., questionnaires, experiments, implicit behavioural measures) to test the hypothesis derived from theoretical models.
Content:
(1) Introduction to the main theories on foregrounding and literariness (e.g. R. Jakobson, V. Slovskij, S. Fish, Miall/Kuiken) and ways to capture foregrounding in the texts (“Quantitative and qualitative methods of textual analysis”) and in readers’ reactions (e.g. questionnaires, EEG, eyetracking). (2) Introduction on general principles of cognitive modelling using the example of NCPM and (3) hands-on sessions on how to combine methods of textual analysis and the social sciences to test hypotheses derived from theoretical models.
Methodology:
(1) Every participant has to study theories of foregrounding, current theoretical cognitive models about literary reading and neurocognitive poetics and quantitative and qualitative methods of textual analysis. After learning more about different direct and indirect methods, participants should be able to formulate testable hypotheses about literary reading and to perform a constructive and critical evaluation of current empirical work in the field of literary reading. (2) Lectures will be used to present wider perspectives on the issues at hand, and to illustrate through paradigmatic examples, which in turn will be used as models for the hands-on sessions. Through the methodological sections ESRs will learn to recognize foregrounding features and to recognize and measure foregrounding effects in the reader’s reactions.
Participants:
Mandatory to ELIT ESRs in WP1 and WP3 and open to additional PhD students (free access)
Meetings:
4-5th April 2022
Registration possible until 31.03.2022:
To register or for questions please send an email to Mesian Tilmatine: m.tilmatine@fu-berlin.de
Link to workshop (Web-Ex meeting)
Program
Monday 04.04.2022
10-12: Introduction of the Foregrounding theories and the Neurocognitive Poetics Model
13-15: Introduction to quantitative and qualitative measures of textual analysis and different direct and indirect methods to measure readers responses
16-18: Hands on session 1 (in small groups):
Each group gets one text and different quantitative measures (already calculated). They first do a short qualitative text analysis. Afterwards each group develops specific hypotheses (based on the NCPM) about how the identified foregrounding features might influence readers’ responses.
Tuesday, 05.04.2022:
10:12: Discussion of the output of the hands on session 1
13-15: Hands on session 2 (in small groups): Each group discus which direct and indirect measures could be used to test the hypothesis
16-18: General discussion of pro and cons of qualitative and quantitative measures of text analysis and how they could combined with direct and indirect measures of readers responses
