literature

Halliday (1978) – Language as Social Semiotic

”The formulation ’language as social semiotic’ says very little by itself … it belongs to a particular conceptual framework, and is intended to suggest particular interpretation of language within that framework ” (Halliday, 1978, p. 1)

“There are to fundamental aspects to the social reality that is encoded in language … Language expresses and symbolizes … dual aspect in its semantic system … organized sound the twin motifs of reflection and action – language as a means of reflecting on things, and language as a means of acting on things. The former is the ’ideational’ component of meaning; the latter is the ’interpersonal’ – one can act symbolically only on persons, not on objects” (Halliday, 1978, p. 2).

Halliday (1978) derives his perspective ”from the ethnographic-descriptive tradition in linguistics: from Saussure and Hjelmslev, from Mathesius and the Prague school, from Malinowski and Firth, brom Boas, Sapir and Whorf” (Halliday, 1978, p. 5). As to socio-linguistics Halliday refers to Labov.

Reference:

Halliday, M.A.K. (1978). Language as Social semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.

Advertisements

Reading Images

Cover of “Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design” By Kress & van Leeuwen (2006), Publisher: Barnes & Noble

After having read and worked with Machin & Mayer’s (2012) book How to Do Critical Discourse Analysis, I have started to read Reading images: the grammar of visual design by Gunther Kress and Teo van Leeuwen, where the authors examine the ways in which images communicate meaning. This book is not available as a free preview to embed, but I link to an extract HERE and at Google books there is an extract from the 1st edition from 1996  available.

 

References:

Kress, G. & Van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading images: the grammar of visual design. London: Routledge.

Kress, G.R. & Van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: the grammar of visual design. (2. ed.) London: Routledge.

How to do Critical Discourse Analysis

I am working my way through multimodal discourse analyses of both (traditional) text and film, using Machin and Mayr’s How to do critical discourse analysis: a multimodal introduction and finding the book very useful.

Reference:

Machin, D. & Mayr, A. (2012). How to do critical discourse analysis: a multimodal introduction. London: Sage.

Reading Images and Film

In multimdodal analysis there is a need to ‘read’ more than traditional text, such as images and film.

Reading Images by Günther Kress and Theo van Leeuwen (2006) is described by the publisher as,

Reading Images focuses on the structures or ‘grammar’ of visual design – colour, perspective, framing and composition – provides the reader with an invaluable ‘tool-kit’ for reading images and makes it a must for anyone interested in communication, the media and the arts.

There is also the conference presentation “Reading Images: Multimodality, Representation and New Media” (Günter Kress, 2004), where you can read the paper and watch/listen to the presentation. The embedded film works without problems with Google Chrome but you may experience difficulties watching if you are using other browsers.


References

Images:

Kress, G.R. (1990). Reading images. Deakin, Victoria: Deakin univ., Press.

Kress, G. R., & Van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading images: The grammar of visual design. Psychology Press.
Kress, G. (2004). Reading images: Multimodality, representation and new media. Information Design Journal, 12(2), 110-119.

Kress, G.R. & Van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: the grammar of visual design. (2. ed.) London: Routledge. (extract at Google books)

 

Film:

Bateman, J and Schmidt, H (2012) Multimodal Film Analysis: How Films Mean. London: Routledge

Burn A & Parker D (2001), ‘Making your Mark: Digital Inscription, Animation, and a New Visual Semiotic’, Education, Communication & Information, Vol. 1, No. 2, pp 155-179

van Leeuwen, T (1985) ‘Rhythmic Structure of the Film Text’, in van Dijk (ed), Discourse and Communication, Berlin: de Gruyter.

Highlights and resources from the 2nd day of Kaleidoscope 2017

Useful highlights and resources from the 2nd day of Kaleidoscope 2017

RECOUP – Cambridge:

Research Consortium on Educational Outcomes and Poverty (RECOUP)

“You can browse the manual using RECOUP Wiki site” at the page  Qualitative Research Training Manual (Faculty of Education, Cambridge): [pdf] RECOUP_Manual.pdf

Literature:

Routledge Series: edited by M. Arnot and C. Colclough Education, Poverty and International Development


BIBAC 2014 Conference (papers?)
BIBAC 2016 conference page

The site teacherknowledge  is site “based on a review of published research literature relating to ‘teacher knowledge’, initiated at the University of Cambridge Faculty of Education

Databases & search engines: ERIC, EBSCO, Google Scholar

 

To read, about monomodal vs multimodal text

Archer, A. (2006). A multimodal approach to academic ‘literacies’: Problematising the visual/verbal divide. Language and Education, 20(6), 449-462.
Flewitt, R. (2008). Multimodal literacies. Desirable literacies: Approaches to language and literacy in the early years, 122-139.
Gunel, M., Hand, B., & Gunduz, S. (2006). Comparing student understanding of quantum physics when embedding multimodal representations into two different writing formats: Presentation format versus summary report format. Science Education, 90(6), 1092-1112.
Hull, G. A., & Nelson, M. E. (2005). Locating the semiotic power of multimodality. Written communication, 22(2), 224-261.
Iedema, R. (2003). Multimodality, resemiotization: Extending the analysis of discourse as multi-semiotic practice. Visual communication, 2(1), 29-57.

Jewitt, C. (2005). Multimodality,“reading”, and “writing” for the 21st century. Discourse: studies in the cultural politics of education, 26(3), 315-331.

Lappe, C., Herholz, S. C., Trainor, L. J., & Pantev, C. (2008). Cortical plasticity induced by short-term unimodal and multimodal musical training. Journal of Neuroscience, 28(39), 9632-9639.
Serafini, F. (2012). Expanding the four resources model: Reading visual and multi-modal texts. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 7(2), 150-164.
Smith, B. E., Kiili, C., & Kauppinen, M. (2016). Transmediating argumentation: Students composing across written essays and digital videos in higher education. Computers & Education, 102, 138-151.
Togia, A., & Tsigilis, N. (2006). Impact factor and education journals: A critical examination and analysis. International Journal of Educational Research, 45(6), 362-379.
Walsh, M. (2006). The’textual shift’: Examining the reading process with print, visual and multimodal texts. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, The, 29(1), 24.

Visual research literature (and learning)

This is a to-read list, which means this is a working document subject to continuous change.


Adami, E. (2009) ‘We/YouTube’: Exploring sign-making in video-interaction’. Visual Communication, 8 (4): 379-400.

Angelillo, C., Rogoff, B., and Chavajay, P. (2009) Examining shared endeavors by abstracting video coding schemes, in Goldman, R., Pea,R, Barron and Derry Video Research in the learning sciences Routledge: New York: 189-206

Banks, M. (2001) Visual Methods in Social Research. London: Sage. (available at HDB)

Barron, B. and ENGLE, R. (2007) Analyzing Data Derived From Video Records in Derry, S. (ed) Guidelines For Video Research In Education: Recommendations From An Expert Panel, Data Research and Development Center (NORC at the University of Chicago) http://drdc.uchicago.edu/what/video-research.html: 28-37

Bezemer, J. and Mavers, D. (2011) ‘Multimodal transcription as academic practice: a social semiotic perspective’, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 14: 3, 191 — 206

Birdwhistell, R. (1970) Kinesics and Context: Essays on Body Motion Communication. London: Allen.

Buckingham, D. and Willet, R. (2009) Video Cultures: Media Technology and Everyday Creativity. London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Cope, B., & Kalantzis, M. (2015). The things you do to know: An introduction to the pedagogy of multiliteracies. In A Pedagogy of Multiliteracies (pp. 1-36). Palgrave Macmillan UK.

Derry, S. (ed) (2007) Guidelines For Video Research In Education: Recommendations From An Expert Panel, Data Research and Development Center (NORC at the University of Chicago) http://drdc.uchicago.edu/what/video-research.html.

Erickson, F. (2009) Ways of seeing video: Toward a phenomenology of viewing minimally edited footage, in Goldman, R., Pea,R, Barron and Derry Video Research in the learning sciences Routledge: New York: 145-158.

Flewitt, R. (2006) Using video to investigate preschool classroom interaction: education research assumptions and methodological practices, Visual Communication February vol. 5 no. 1 25-50.

Gilje, O. (2009) Mode, Mediation and Moving Images: An Inquiry of Digital Editing Practices in Media Education, Published PhD. Faculty of Education, University of Oslo, Norway.

Gjedde, L. and Ingemann, B. (2008) Researching Experiences; Exploring Processual and experimental Methods in Cultural Analsysis. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Goldman, R. (2009) Video representations and the perspectivity framework, in Goldman, R., Pea,R, Barron and Derry Video Research in the learning sciences Routledge: New York: 3-38.

Goldman, R., Erickson, F., Lemke, J. and Derry, S. (2007) Selection in video, in Derry, S. (ed) (2007) Guidelines For Video Research In Education: Recommendations From An Expert Panel, Data Research and Development Center (NORC at the University of Chicago) http://drdc.uchicago.edu/what/video-research.html: 19 – 27

Goldman, S. and McDermott, R. (2009) Staying the course with video analysis, in Goldman, R., Pea,R, Barron and Derry Video Research in the learning sciences Routledge: New York: 101-114.

Goodwin, C. (2000) Action and embodiment within situated human interaction, Journal of Pragmatics, 32: 1489 – 1522

Goodwin, C. and Goodwin,M. (1996) ‘Seeing as situated activity’. In Y.Engerstrom and D.Middleton (eds.) Cognition and Communication at Work (pp.61-95). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hall, R. (2007) Strategies For Video Recording: in Derry, S. (ed) (2007) Guidelines For Video Research In Education: Recommendations From An Expert Panel, Data Research and Development Center (NORC at the University of Chicago) http://drdc.uchicago.edu/what/video-research.html: 8-18

Han, C. (2015). How to do critical discourse analysis: A multimodal introduction.

Roth, W.M, (2009) Epistemic mediation: Video data as filters for the objectification of teaching by teachers, in Goldman, R., Pea,R, Barron and Derry (2006) Video Research in the learning sciences Routledge: New York: 367-382.

Hughes, J. (Ed.). (2012). SAGE visual methods. SAGE. (eBook available at SUB)

Jewitt, C., Bezemer, J., Jones, K. and Kress, G. (2009)Changing English? The impact of technology and policy on a school subject in the 21st century. English Teaching: Practice and critique 8(3): 21-40.

Jewitt, C. (2008) Technology, Literacy and Learning: A Multimodal Perspective. London:Routledge.

Jewitt, C (2012) An Introduction to Using Video for Research. NCRM Working Paper. NCRM E-prints.

Jewitt, C. (2011) (Guest editor) Video Based Social Research. Special issue of the International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 14, 3.

Kalantzis, M., & Cope, B. (2015). Learning and new media. The Sage handbook of learning, 373-387.

Kissmann, U. (ed.) (2009) Video Interaction Analysis, Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

Knoblauch, H., Schnettler, B., Raab, J., and Soeffner, H. (eds.) (2006) Video analysis– Methodology and Methods: Qualitative Audiovisual Data Analysis in Sociology. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.

Kress. G., Jewitt, C., Ogborn, J., and Tsatsarelis, C. (2001) Multimodal teaching and learning: The rhetorics of the science classroom. London, UK: Continuum.

Kress. G., Jewitt, Jones, K, Bourne, J., Franks, A and Hardcastle, J. (2005) English in Urban Classrooms. London, UK: Routledge.

Lahlou, S. (2011) How can we capture the subject’s perspective?: an evidence-based approach for the social scientist. Social science information, 50 (4). pp. 607-655.

Lemke, J. (2009) Video epistemology in and outside the box, in Goldman, R., Pea,R, Barron and Derry Video Research in the learning sciences Routledge: New York: 39 – 52.

Lomax, H. and Casey, N. (1998) ‘Recording Social Life: Reflexivity and Video Methodology’. Sociological Research Online, vol. 3, no. 2. http://www.socresonline.org.uk/3/2/1.html (Accessed: 28.01.11)

Mavrikis, M. and Geraniou, E. (2011) ‘Using Qualitative Data Analysis Software to analyse students’ computer-mediated interactions: the case of MiGen and Transana’, International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 14: 3, 245 — 252

Tochon, F. (2009) From video cases to video pedagogy, in Goldman, R., Pea,R, Barron and Derry (2006) Video Research in the learning sciences Routledge: New York: 53-66.

Ruby, J. (ed) (1992) A Crack in the mirror, University of Pennsylvania Press.

Scollon, R. and Wong-Scollon, S. (2010) ‘Multimodality and language: a retrospective and prospective view’ in C.Jewitt (ed.) Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis (pp. 170- 180). London: Routledge.

Schubert (2006) Video analysis as practice and the practice of video analysis in Knoblauch, H., Schnettler, B., Raab, J., and Soeffner, H. (eds.) Video analysis: Methodology and Methods: Qualitative Audiovisual Data Analysis in Sociology. Frankfurt: Peter Lang:115-126.

Julia Snell (2011) ‘Interrogating video data: systematic quantitative analysis versus micro- ethnographic analysis’ International Journal Of Social Research Methodology,
14 (3), pp. 253-258.

Tobin, J. and Hsueh, Y (2009) The poetics and pleasures of video ethnography of education, in Goldman, R., Pea,R, Barron and Derry (2006) Video Research in the learning sciences Routledge: New York: 77-92.

White, S.A. (2003) Participatory Video: Images that Transform and Empower. Dehli, India: Sage.

Zhao, S., Djonov, E., & van Leeuwen, T. (2014). Semiotic technology and practice: a multimodal social semiotic approach to PowerPoint. Text & Talk, 34(3), 349-375.