summary of chapter 48 christina a. clark concord university
DESCRIPTION
Summary of Chapter 48 Christina A. Clark Concord University. The Transactional Theory of Reading and Writing. Four components connect each individual in the transactional model. Reading Writing Experience Communication between author and readers. Reading. Transacting with text - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Summary of Chapter 48
Christina A. Clark
Concord University
The Transactional Theory of Reading and Writing
READING EXPERIENCES WRITING
COMMUNICATION BETWEEN AUTHOR AND READERS
Linguistic Transactions
Transacting with text
Reader’s Stance
Evocation, Response, and Interpretation
Writing Transaction
Writing about texts
Writer’s stance
Authorial Reading
Validity of Interpretation
Warranted Assertibility
Criteria for the continuum
“Literary” aspects of Efferent
Reading
Efferent-Aesthetic Continuum
Four components connect each individual in the transactional model.ReadingWritingExperienceCommunication between author and readers
Reading Transacting with text Perception depends on the viewer’s
selection and organization of visual cues according to past experiences, expectations, needs, and interests. (Ruddell, p1369)
ReadingThe Readers Stance 1). Efferent—The meaning results from
abstracting out and analytically structuring the ideas, information, directions, or conclusions to be retained, used, or acted on after the reading event. (Ruddell, p.1373)2). Aesthetic--The aesthetic reader pays attention to-savors-the qualities of the feelings, ideas, situations, scenes, personalities, and emotions that are called forth and participates in the tensions, conflicts, and resolutions of the images, ideas and scenes as they unfold. (Ruddell, p. 1373)
The ContinuumEfferent and aesthetic reflect the two main
ways of looking at the world—scientifically and artistically. (Ruddell, p. 1374)
Everyone takes one of these stances when choosing to read.
These stances can be intertwined, or one can be dominate.
These stances can be conscious or unconscious.
Stances can be public or private.
Evocation, Response, InterpretationEvocation—an object of thought; how we feel as we are
reading
Response—2 kinds 1). Second Stream of Response—momentary; felt as a
general state 2). Expressed Response—What the reading means to
you (the reader) (Ruddell, p. 1376)
Interpretation—arriving at a sense for the whole. This is how it should be interpreted.
WritingWriting transaction—the writer is always
transacting with a personal, social, and cultural environment. (Ruddell, p. 1378-1379) This is very important to what one will read and/or write.
WritingThe writers stance—is a function of the
circumstances, motives, the subject, and the relation between writer and reader. (Ruddell, p. 1380)
One would not write a letter to the insurance company explaining a car accident, as they would write an e-mail to a friend telling them about the accident.
Writing about textsIn general, is an efferent stance. Aesthetic
may be adopted to communicate an experience, expressing response, or interpretation. (Ruddell, p. 1381)
With the letter to the insurance company about an accident, one may need to take an aesthetic approach to get across how scared one was, or how shocked.
A Writers ReadingTwo kinds of authorial reading 1). Expression-oriented authorial reading leads to
revision as the new words appear on the page. To the writer (authorial reader), the words must be tested for intention and purpose. (Ruddell, p. 1382)
2). Reception-oriented reading is when the writer at some point, dissociates with the text, and reads it through the eyes of potential readers. This is a hypothetical interpretation, and must be checked against the writer’s own inner sense of purpose. (Ruddell, p. 1383)
ExperiencesOur experiences every day make up our
language, which in turn provides for linguistic transactions.
These linguistic transactions will account for how we read, how we write, and what we say. (Ruddell, p. 1367)
Some examples of linguistic transactions are:A conversationCommentsQuestionsFacial expressions
Communication between author and readersValidity of Interpretation—How valid is the
interpretation? The same text takes on different meanings in transactions with different readers, or even with the same reader in different contexts or times. (Ruddell, p. 1384)
Communication between author and readersWarranted Assertibility—when given
shared criteria concerning methods of investigation and kinds of evidence, there can be agreement concerning the decision as to what is a sound interpretation of the evidence, or a “Warranted assertion” (Ruddell, p. 1385)
Communication between author and readersCriteria for the efferent-aesthetic
continuum—is the idea that because we can choose on a range of efferent-aesthetic, it becomes important for writers to provide clear indications as to what stance they have chosen and for readers to be sensitive to the writer’s purpose, and to apply relevant criteria. (Ruddell, p. 1386)
Communication between author and readers“Literary” aspects of Efferent Reading-is
the idea that the stance we take as readers/listeners/writers, will determine the appropriate criteria. (Ruddell, p. 1386)
When a politician is talking about the “wave of the future”, more than likely we, as listeners, will not start daydreaming about waves on the beach, and imagining what the sand beneath our toes would feel like. We will remain at an efferent stance.
References
Rosenblatt, L. M. (1994). The Transactional Theory of
Reading and Writing. In Ruddell, R. B., & Unrau, N.
J. (2004) Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading. (pp. 1363-1398). Newark, DE:
International Reading Association