A REVIEW OF LITERATURE’S CONTRIBUTION TO LINGUISTICS EDUCATION
Downloads
Objective: This study investigates the integration of linguistic methods—specifically structuralist and semantic frameworks—into literary criticism to enhance textual interpretation and reader engagement. Method: A qualitative, descriptive-analytical approach was employed, analyzing selected English and Persian literary texts with a focus on phonological, grammatical, and semantic elements. Results: The findings reveal that linguistic features such as phoneme sequencing, grammatical ambiguity, and metaphorical language significantly shape reader response and thematic perception. Structuralist criticism deciphers formal patterns, while semantic analysis exposes deeper emotional and ideological layers within literary works. Novelty: The research offers a novel synthesis of linguistic and literary approaches, proposing a comprehensive, interdisciplinary model that bridges theoretical gaps and transcends disciplinary boundaries. This model advocates for a pedagogical shift in literature education, encouraging the use of linguistic tools to cultivate critical thinking and interpretive precision. The proposed framework demonstrates universal applicability across languages and genres, contributing both to the enrichment of literary scholarship and the advancement of curriculum development.
W. Empson, The Structure of Complex Words. London: Chatto & Windus, 1951.
G. Hartman, “The voice of the shuttle: Language from the point of view of literature,” Review of Metaphysics, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 240–258, 1970.
P. Larkin, The Less Deceived, 5th ed. London: Marvell Press, 1955.
G. Leech, “Literary criticism and linguistic description,” The Dutch Quarterly Review of Anglo-American Letters, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 2–22, 1977.
C. Norris, “The importance of Empson (II): The criticism,” Essays in Criticism, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 25–44, 1985.
I. A. Richards, “Jacobson's Shakespeare: The subliminal structures of a sonnet,” Times Literary Supplement, vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 589–590, 1970.
L. Spitzer, “On Yeats's poem, ‘Leda and the Swan’,” Modern Philology, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 71–76, 1948.
L. Spitzer, Linguistics and Literary History: Essays in Stylistics. Ann Arbor: Russell & Russell, The University of Michigan, 1962.
H. Widdowson, Stylistics and the Teaching of Literature. London: Longman, 1975.
M. Yahaghi and A. Sanchuli, “Symbol and its origin in the poetry of Nima Yooshij,” Gawhar-i Guya (Researches in Mystical Literature), vol. 5, no. 2, pp. 43–64, 2011. (Original poem: N. Yooshij, “Ghoghnoos [Phoenix],” 1937)
R. Carter, “Literature and language teaching 1986–2006: A review,” International Journal of Applied Linguistics, vol. 17, no. 1, pp. 3–13, 2007.
G. Hall, Literature in Language Education. New York: Springer, 2005.
J. van Rijt, P. de Swart, and P. A. Coppen, “Linguistic concepts in L1 grammar education: A systematic literature review,” Research Papers in Education, vol. 34, no. 5, pp. 621–648, 2019.
F. Christie and L. Unsworth, “Developing dimensions of an educational linguistics,” in Continuing Discourse on Language: A Functional Perspective, vol. 1, pp. 217–250, 2005.
S. B. Heath, “Linguistics and education,” Annual Review of Anthropology, pp. 251–274, 1984.
Copyright (c) 2025 Mohammed Hameed Rasheed
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
