Skip to content
2018
Volume 59, Issue 3
  • ISSN: 0034-527X
  • E-ISSN: 1943-2348
side by side viewer icon HTML

Abstract

Language arts and literacy curricula around the world have been advocating for the teaching and learning of literature in multiple forms. However, apparently in much of classroom practice, little attention has been given to distinguishing the literary distinctiveness of multiple forms of ostensibly the same story. Developing an appreciation of the distinctive interpretive possibilities of multi-version literary narratives may be facilitated by semiotic analyses that indicate how the deployment of image, paralanguage, and language resources have been designed to orient the audience to particular interpretive options. Understanding how to analyze texts to determine such orientations is a crucial aspect of critical literacy. In this paper, we draw on systemic functional linguistics and its extension to the description of the meaning-making resources of image and paralanguage to focus on how differences in characterization are achieved in three versions of the story of Coraline.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.58680/rte2025593285
2025-02-01
2026-06-09
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/rte/59/3/researchintheteachingofenglish593285.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.58680/rte2025593285&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. ACARA (2012) Australian curriculum: English. http://www.australiancurriculumedu.au
    [Google Scholar]
  2. ACARA (2024) Australian curriculum: English. Retrieved July 17, 2024, fromhttps://v9.australiancurriculum.edu.au/teacher-resources/understand-this-learning-area/english
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Austen J. (1946) Emma. Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bordwell D. (1991) Making meaning: Inference and rhetoric in the interpretation of cinema. Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. British Columbia (2019) British Columbia’s curriculum—English language arts. https://curriculum.gov.bc.ca/curriculum/english-language-arts
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Browne A. (1989) The tunnel. Julia MacRae.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Burnett F. H. (2014) The secret garden. First Avenue Editions.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Callow J., & Zammit K. (2002) Visual literacy: From picture books to electronic texts. In Monteith M. (Ed.), Teaching primary literacy with ICT (pp. 188–201). Open University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Chandler D. (1997) An introduction to genre theory. Retrieved July 17, 2024, fromhttp://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/intgenre/chandler_genre_theory.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Childs P., & Fowler, R. (Eds) (2006) The Routledge dictionary of literary terms. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Culpeper J. (2014) Language and characterisation: People in plays and other texts. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Dahl R. (2001) The witches (3rd ed.). Puffin
    [Google Scholar]
  13. de Saint-Exupèry A. (2000) The little prince. Penguin.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Department for Education (2014) National curriculum in England: English programmes of study. Gov. UK. Retrieved April 8, 2020, from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-english-programmes-of-study/national-curriculum-in-england-english-programmes-of-study#key-stage-3
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Farías A., Moreschi M., & Romero Day M. (2022) Understanding and creating bimodal narratives in the EFL classroom: The role of images in picture story books. Teseo Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Gaiman N. (2002) Coraline (McKean, D. Illus.). HarperCollins.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Gaiman N. (2008) Coraline: The graphic novel (Russell, P. C. Illus.). Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Gee J. (2003) What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen C. (2004) An introduction to functional grammar. Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Knowles M., & Malmkjaer K. (1996) Language and control in children’s literature. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Kress G., & van Leeuwen T. (2021) Read ing images: The grammar of visual design (3rd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003099857
    [Google Scholar]
  22. L’Engle M. (1991) A wrinkle in time. Chivers.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Lewis D. (2001) Reading contemporary picturebooks: Picturing text. Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. London J. (2005) The call of the wild. Kingfisher.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Luke C. (2000) Cyber-schooling and technological change. In Cope B. & Kalantzis M. (Eds.), Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures (pp. 69–91). Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Macken-Horarik M. (2003) Appraisal and the special instructiveness of narrative. TEXT, 23(2), 285–312. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2003.012
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Macken-Horarik M. (2006) Hierarchies in diversities: What students’ examined responses tell us about literacy practices in contemporary school English. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 29(1), 52–78.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Macken-Horarik M. (2016) Building a metalanguage for interpreting multimodal literature: Insights from systemic functional semiotics in two case study classrooms. English in Australia, 51(2), 85–99.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Macken-Horarik M., & Sandiford C. (2016) Diagnosing development: A grammatics for tracking student progress in narrative composition. International Journal of Language Studies, 10(3), 61–94.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Macken-Horarik M., Unsworth L., & Love, K. (2011-2013) Grammar and praxis: Investigating a grammatics for 21st century school English [Grant].
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Mackey M. (1994) The new basics: Learning to read in a multi-media world. English in Education, 28(1), 9–19.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Martin J. R. (1992) English text: System and structure. John Benjamins.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Martin, J. R., & Rose D. (2008) Genre relations: Mapping culture. Equinox.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Martin J. R., & White P. (2005) The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Massachusetts Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (2017) Massachusetts curriculum framework—2017: English language arts and literacy. https://www.doe.mass.edu/frameworks/ela/2017-06.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  36. McDonald L. (1999) A case study of an apprenticeship in critical reading [Doctoral dissertation, University of Sydney].
    [Google Scholar]
  37. McDonald L. (2017) A literature companion for teachers (2nd ed.). Primary English Teaching Association Australia.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Mills K. A., Stone B. G., Unsworth L., & Friend L. (2020) Multimodal language of attitude in digital composition. Written Communication, 37(2), 135–166. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088319897978
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Mills K. A., & Unsworth L. (2018) iPad animations: Powerful multimodal practices for adolescent literacy and emotional language. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 61(6), 609–620.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Mills K., Unsworth L., & Scholes L. (2023) Literacy for digital futures: Mind, body, text. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003137368
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Montgomery L. M. (1999) Anne of Green Gables. Goose Lane Editions.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Moon B. (2016) Introducing literature: A practical guide to literary analysis, criticism, and theory (Mellor B. Ed.). Chalkface Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Moon B. (2017) Literary terms: A practical glossary (3rd ed.). Chalkface Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Moya Guijarro A. J. (2014) A multimodal analysis of picture books for children: A systemic functional approach. Equinox.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. New Zeal and Ministry of Education (2020) The New Zealand curriculum: English. Retrieved April 18, 2020, from https://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/The-New-Zealand-Curriculum/English
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Ngo T. (2016) Developing a differentiated model for the teaching of creative writing to high performing students. English in Australia, 51(2), 63–73.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Ngo T. (2018) Gesture as transduction of characterisation in children’s literature animation adaptation. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 41(1), 30–43.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Ngo T., Hood S., Martin J., Painter C., Smith, B. A., & Zappavigna M. (2022) Modelling paralanguage using systemic functional semiotics. Bloomsbury.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Ngo T., & Unsworth L. (2015) Reworking the appraisal framework in ESL research: refining attitude resources. Functional Linguistics, 2(1), 1–24.
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Painter C., Martin J. R., & Unsworth L. (2013) Reading visual narratives: Image analysis of children’s picture books. Equinox.
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Paronnaud V., & Satrapi, M. (Directors) (2007) Persepolis [Film]. Sony Pictures Classics.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Pullman P. (1996) The golden compass (1st ed.). Alfred A. Knopf.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Rothery J., & Stenglin M. (2000) Interpreting literature: The role of APPRAISAL. In Unsworth L. (Ed.), Researching language in schools and communities: Functional linguistic perspectives (pp. 222–244). Cassell Academic.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Ruhemann A., & Tan S. (Directors) (2010) The lost thing [Film]. Passion Pictures.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Satrapi M. (2006) Persepolis. Random House.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Scorsese, M. (Director) (2011) Hugo [Film]. Paramount Pictures.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Selick, H. (Director) (2009) Coraline [Film]. Universal Pictures.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Selznick B. (2007) The invention of Hugo Cabret. Scholastic.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Singapore Ministry of Education (2019) English language and literature. https://www.moe.gov.sg/education/syllabuses/english-language-and-literature
    [Google Scholar]
  60. Tan S. (2000) The lost thing. Hachette.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Tolkien, J. R. R. (2008) The hobbit (Lee, A. Illus.). HarperCollins.
    [Google Scholar]
  62. Unsworth, L. (Ed) (2024) Coding animated narratives: Classroom practices for developing digital multimodal authoring. Primary English Teaching Association Australia.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. Unsworth L., & Macken-Horarik M. (2015) Interpretive responses to images in picture books by primary and secondary school students: Exploring curriculum expectations of a “visual grammatics.”English in Education, 49(1), 56–79. https://doi.org/10.1111/eie.12047
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Unsworth L., & Mills K. A. (2020) English language teaching of attitude and emotion in digital multimodal composition. Journal of Second Language Writing, 47, Article 100712. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100712
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.58680/rte2025593285
Loading
/content/journals/10.58680/rte2025593285
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test