Metalepsis in Elementary Students’ Multimodal Narrative Representations

References

1. Bell A.. (2014)  Media-specific metalepsis in 10:01. Bell A. Ensslin A. Rustad H. K.. (Eds.), Analyzing digital fiction, 21–38. London: Routledge.
   [Google Scholar]
2. Bell A. Alber J.. (2012)  Ontological metalepsis and unnatural narratology. Journal of Narrative Theory, 42, 166–192.
   [Google Scholar]
3. Bezemer J. Kress G.. (2016)  Multimodality, learning and communication: A social semiotic frame, Oxon, United Kingdom: Routledge.
   [Google Scholar]
4. Brown P.. (2013)  Mr. Tiger goes wild, New York: Little, Brown.
   [Google Scholar]
5. Browne A.. (1998)  Voices in the park, London: Picture Corgi Books.
   [Google Scholar]
6. Caldwell D. White P. R. R.. (2017)  That’s not a narrative; this is a narrative: NAPLAN and pedagogies of storytelling. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 40, 16–27.
   [Google Scholar]
7. Catalanotto P.. (2007)  Ivan the terrier, New York: Atheneum Books for Young Readers.
   [Google Scholar]
8. Cope B. Kalantzis M.. (2013)  “Multiliteracies”: New literacies, new learning. Hawkins M. R.. (Ed.), Framing languages and literacies: Socially situated views and perspectives, 105–135. New York: Routledge.
   [Google Scholar]
9. Falatko J. Miller T.. (2016)  Snappsy the alligator (Did not ask to be in this book!), New York: Viking.
   [Google Scholar]
10. Feyersinger E.. (2010)  Diegetic short circuits: Metalepsis in animation. Animation: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 5, 279–294.
    [Google Scholar]
11. Fitzgerald J. Teasley A. B.. (1986)  Effects of instruction in narrative structure on children’s writing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78(6), 424–432.
    [Google Scholar]
12. Fludernik M.. (2003)  Scene shift, metalepsis, and the metaleptic mode. Style, 37, 382–400.
    [Google Scholar]
13. Fludernik M.. (2009)  An introduction to narratology, London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
14. Genette G.. (1980)  Narrative discourse: An essay in method Lewin J.. Trans. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
15. Genette G.. (1988)  Narrative discourse: Revisited Lewin J.. Trans Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
16. Hanebeck J.. (2017)  Understanding metalepsis: The hermeneutics of narrative transgression, Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
17. Heath S. B.. (1983)  Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities and classrooms, Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
18. Herman D.. (1997)  Toward a formal description of narrative metalepsis. Journal of Literary Semantics, 26, 132–152.
    [Google Scholar]
19. Jewitt C.. (2007)  A multimodal perspective on textuality and contexts. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 15, 275–289.
    [Google Scholar]
20. Jewitt C.. (2009)  Different approaches to multimodality. Jewitt C.. (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of multimodal analysis, 28–39. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
21. Klimek S.. (2011)  Metalepsis in fantasy fiction. Kukkonen K. Klimek S.. (Eds.), Metalepsis in popular culture, 22–40. Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
22. Kress G.. (2010)  Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication, London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
23. Kress G.. (2015)  Semiotic work: Applied linguistics and a social semiotic account of multimodality. AILA Review, 28, 49–71.
    [Google Scholar]
24. Kukkonen K.. (2011)  Metalepsis in popular culture: An introduction. Kukkonen K. Klimek S.. (Eds.), Metalepsis in popular culture, 1–21. Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
25. Kukkonen K. Klimek S. (Eds.) (2011)  Metalepsis in popular culture, Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
26. McCabe A.. (1997)  Cultural background and storytelling: A review and implications for schooling. The Elementary School Journal, 97, 453–473.
    [Google Scholar]
27. McCallum R.. (2008)  Would I lie to you? Metalepsis and modal disruption in some “true” fairy tales. Sipe L. R. Pantaleo S.. (Eds.), Postmodern picturebooks: Play, parody, and self-referentiality, 180–192. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
28. McKinlay M. Rudge L.. (2011)  NO BEARS, Cambridge, MA: Candlewick Press.
    [Google Scholar]
29. Nelles W.. (2002)  Stories within stories: Narrative levels and embedded narratives. Richardson B.. (Ed.), Narrative dynamics: Essays on time, plot, closure, and frames, 339–353. Columbus: The Ohio State University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
30. O’Neill P.. (2005)  Narrative structure. Herman D. Jahn M. Ryan M.-L.. (Eds.), Routledge encyclopedia of narrative theory, 366–370. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
31. Pantaleo S.. (2008)  Exploring student response to contemporary picturebooks, Toronto Canada: University of Toronto Press.
    [Google Scholar]
32. Pantaleo S.. (2011)  WARNING: A grade 7 student disrupts narrative boundaries. Journal of Literacy Research, 43, 39–67.
    [Google Scholar]
33. Pantaleo S.. (2014)  The metafictive nature of postmodern picturebooks. The Reading Teacher, 67, 324–332.
    [Google Scholar]
34. Pantaleo S. 2016a Primary students transgress storyworld boundaries in their multimodal compositions. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 30, 237–251.
    [Google Scholar]
35. Pantaleo S. 2016b Teacher expectations and student literacy engagement and achievement. Literacy, 50, 83–92.
    [Google Scholar]
36. Pier J.. (2011)  Afterword. Kukkonen K. Klimek S.. (Eds.), Metalepsis in popular culture, 268–279. Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
37. Pier J. 2016a Metalepsis (revised version; uploaded 13 July 2016). The Living Handbook of Narratology, Retrieved February 27, 2018 from Hamburg University websitehttp://www.lhn.uni-hamburg.de
    [Google Scholar]
38. Pier J. 2016b The configuration of narrative sequences. Baroni R. Françoise R.. (Eds.), Narrative sequence in contemporary narratology, 20–36. Columbus: The Ohio State University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
39. Prince G.. (2003)  Dictionary of narratology, (Revised ed.) Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
    [Google Scholar]
40. Prince G.. (2006)  Disturbing frames. Poetics Today, 27, 625–630.
    [Google Scholar]
41. Ranker J.. (2012)  Young students’ uses of visual composing resources in literacy classroom contexts: A cross-case analysis. Visual Communication, 11, 461–483.
    [Google Scholar]
42. Ranker J.. (2014)  The emergence of semiotic resource complexes in the composing processes of young students in a literacy context. Linguistics and Education, 25, 129–144.
    [Google Scholar]
43. Rubik M.. (2005)  Provocative and unforgettable: Peter Carey’s short fiction—a cognitive approach. European Journal of English Studies, 9, 169–184.
    [Google Scholar]
44. Ryan M.-L.. (2004)  Metaleptic machines. Semiotica, 2004(150), 439–469.
    [Google Scholar]
45. Spiro R. J. Coulson R. L. Feltovich P. J. Anderson D. K.. (2013)  Cognitive flexibility theory: Advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. Alvermann D. E. Unrau N. J. Ruddell R. B.. (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading6th ed., 544–557. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
    [Google Scholar]
46. Thon J.-N.. (2016)  Transmedial narratology and contemporary media culture, Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.
    [Google Scholar]
47. Vygotsky L.. (1978)  Mind in society, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
48. Waugh P.. (1984)  Metafiction: The theory and practice of self-conscious fiction, New York: Methuen.
    [Google Scholar]
49. Wiesner D.. (2001)  The three pigs, New York: Clarion Books.
    [Google Scholar]
50. Wiesner D.. (2006)  Flotsam, New York: Clarion Books.
    [Google Scholar]
51. Wolf W.. (2013)  “Unnatural” metalepsis and immersion: Necessarily incompatible?. Abler J. Nielsen H. S. Richardson B.. (Eds.), A poetics of unnatural narrative, 113–141. Columbus: The Ohio State University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
52. Zapata A. Van Horn S.. (2017)  “Because I’m smooth”: Material intra-actions and text productions among young Latino picture book makers. Research in the Teaching of English, 51, 290–316.
    [Google Scholar]