Within the total picture of literary communication, the reader has usually been an expert, mainly the literary critic. This article explores the immediate responses reported by a group of ordinary readers after reading a contemporary poem by Richard Eberhart. These responses are classified according to typical operations: staging, hedging, citing, associating with key words, paraphrasing, normalizing and generalizing. Examples of each type are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
GroebenN., Empirical Methods for the Study and Interpretation of Literature, Discourse Processes, 3, pp. 345–367, 1980.
2.
de BeaugrandeR., Surprised by Syncretism: Cognition and Literary Criticism, Poetics, 12, pp. 83–137, 1983.
3.
FishS., Literature in the Reader: Affective Stylistics, New Literary History, 1, pp. 123–162, 1970.
4.
FishS., Interpreting the Variorum, Critical Inquiry, 2, pp. 465–485, 1976.
5.
IserW., The Act of Reading, Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, 1978.
6.
IserW., Texts and Readers, Discourse Processes, 3, pp. 326–343, 1980.
7.
RiffaterreM., Describing Poetic Structures, Yale French Studies, 36/37, pp. 200–242, 1966.
8.
JaussH. R., Toward an Aesthetics of Experience, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, 1982.
9.
BauerW., Text und Rezeption, Athenaeum, Frankfurt, 1972.
10.
HeuermannH.HuehnP., and RoettgerB. (eds.), Literarische Rezeption, Schoeningh, Paderborn, 1975.
11.
WienoldG., Semiotik der Literatur, Athenaeum, Frankfurt, 1972.
12.
GroebenN., Rezeptionsforschung als empirische Literaturwissenschaft, Scriptor, Kronberg, 1980.
13.
MukařbvskýJ., Standard Language and Poetic Language, in A Prague School Reader on Esthetics, Literary Structure, and Style, GarvinP. (ed.), Georgetown University Press, Washington, D.C., pp. 17–30, 1964.
14.
de BeaugrandeR., Schemas for Literary Communication, paper presented at the Hungarian-American Conference on Perception and Interpretation of Social Interaction in Literature, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, 1983.
15.
de BeaugrandeR., Text, Discourse, and Process, Longman, London, 1980.
16.
de BeaugrandeR., Design Criteria for Process Models of Reading, Reading Research Quarterly, 16, pp. 261–315, 1980–81.
17.
BrazilD., The Place of Intonation in a Discourse Model, in Studies in Discourse Analysis, CoulthardM. and MontgomeryM. (eds.), Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, pp. 146–157, 1981.
18.
de BeaugrandeR., Text Production, Ablex, Norwood, New Jersey, 1983.
19.
HirschE. D., Validity in Interpretation, Yale University Press, New Haven, 1967.
20.
FreyE., Franz Kafkas Erzaehlstil. Eine Demonstration neuer stilanalytischer Methoden, Franke, Bern, 1970.
21.
RiffaterreM., Criteria for Style Analysis, Word, 15, pp. 154–174, 1959.
22.
SchmidtS. J., Empirical Foundations for Literary Studies, Buske, Hamburg, 1982.
