Issues of understanding a literary text from a psycholinguistic perspective
https://doi.org/10.30515/0131-6141-2023-84-5-56-68
Abstract
The article describes psycholinguistic methods used to model the processes of modern schoolchildren’s perception and comprehension of the text of A. P. Chekhov’s short story "The Death of a Government Clerk". We postulate that the processes of perceiving and understanding fictional texts are conditioned by several factors. These include the quality of the text itself, its size, the closeness of the work to recipients, recipients’ gender- and age-specific qualities, and the peculiarities of their conceptual systems. The research data are the results of two-stage psycholinguistic experiments conducted with the participation of Omsk secondary and vocational school students. The first stage was performed according to the method of semantic differential. It aimed to diagnose the process of emotional perception in the experimental subjects. In the second stage, the students had to answer questions concerning the basic semantic lines of the text. The first stage revealed an emotional attitude to the text and the influence of the gender factor. The former was manifested in different intensities of the evaluation parameters concentrated in the area of negative coefficients. The second stage showed the results of the comprehension process as the totality of gender-, socially, and psychologically determined interpretations of the semantic content of the text. The comprehension process is associated with choosing certain supports such as particular textual signs, the socio-psychological model of the author, the plot, and others.
About the Authors
L. O. Butakova
Omsk State University named after F. M. Dostoevsky
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Larisa O. Butakova, Doctor of Sciences (Philology), Professor
Omsk
E. N. Guts
Omsk State University named after F. M. Dostoevsky
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Elena N. Guts, Doctor of Sciences (Philology), Professor
Omsk
References
1. Butakova L. O. Cognitive nature of the polymodal text perception and its psycholinguistic modeling. Voprosy kognitivnoi lingvistiki = Issues of Cognitive Linguistics. 2016;4:21–32. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.20916/1812-3228-2016-4-21-32
2. Vashunina I. V., Il’ina V. A., Makhovikov D. V. et al. Perception of the text and its syntactic, lexical and stylistic components. Vestnik Chelyabinskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta = Bulletin of Chelyabinsk State University. Philology Sciences. 2020;1:39– 46. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24411/1994-2796-2020-10105
3. Goots E. N., Khudyakova N. O. Directional associative experiment as a tool for studying the value components of the elderly’s language world picture. Etnopsicholingvistika = Ethnopsycholinguistics. 2018;1:112–125. (In Russ.)
4. Zhinkin N. I. Speech as a conductor of information. Moscow: The science, 1982. 157 p. (In Russ.)
5. Zalevskaya A. A. Word. Text. Selected Works. Moscow: Gnosis, 2005. 543 p. (In Russ.)
6. Zalevskaya A. A., Kaminskaya E. E., Medvedeva I. L. et al. Psycholinguistic aspects of word-text interaction. Tver: TSU, 1998. 206 p. (In Russ.)
7. Zimnyaya I. A. Linguopsychology of speech activity. Moscow: MPSI; Voronezh: MODEK. 2001. 432 p. [Electronic resource]. URL: https://psychlib.ru/mgppu/zlp/zlp-001-.htm#hid29 (accessed: 22.03.2023). (In Russ.)
8. Creolized text: semantic perception. I. V. Vashunina, M. O. Matveev, A. A. Nistratov et al.; ed. by I. V. Vashunina. Moscow: Institute of Linguistics RAS, 2020. 205 p. (In Russ.)
9. Leont’ev A. A. Fundamentals of psycholinguistics. 3rd ed. Moscow: Meaning; Saint Petersburg: Lan’, 2003. 287 p. (In Russ.)
10. Myagkova E. V. Emotional and sensory component of word meaning. Kursk: KSPU, 2000. 110 p. (In Russ.)
11. Novikov A. I. Semantics of the text and its formalization. Moscow: The science, 1983. 215 p. (In Russ.)
12. Novikov A. I. Text and "counter-text": two sides of the understanding process. Voprosy psicholingvistiki = Journal of Psycholinguistics. 2003;1:64– 76. (In Russ.)
13. Petrenko V. F. Fundamentals of psychosemantics. 2nd ed., enlarged. Saint Petersburg: Piter, 2005. 480 p. (In Russ.)
14. Peshkova N. P. The project: "Text psycholinguistics. Text and its sense: regional investigations of the A. I. Novikov school". Voprosy psicholingvistiki = Journal of psycholinguistics. 2018;2:168–181. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.30982/2077-5911-2-168-181.
15. Pishchal’nikova V. A. History and theory of psycholinguistics. Moscow: R.Valent, 2021. 488 p. (In Russ.)
16. Russian psycholinguistics: results and perspectives (1966–2021). Ed. by I. A. Sternin, N. V. Ufimtseva, E. Yu. Myagkova. Moscow: Institute of Linguistics – MMA, 2021. 626 p. (In Russ.)
17. Ferreira F., Yang Z. The problem of comprehension in psycholinguistics. Discourse Processes. 2019;56(7):485–495. (In Engl.) https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2019.1591885.
18. Tschense M., Wallot S. Modeling items for text comprehension assessment using confirmatory factor analysis. Frontiers in Psychology. 2022;13:966347. (In Engl.) https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.966347.
19. Tourimpampa A., Drigas A., Economou A., Roussos P. Perception and text comprehension: it’s a matter of perception. International journal of emerging technologies in learning. 2018;13(7):228–232. (In Engl.) https://doi.org/10.3991/ijet.v13i07.7909
Review
For citations:
Butakova L.O., Guts E.N. Issues of understanding a literary text from a psycholinguistic perspective. Russian language at school. 2023;84(6):56-68. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.30515/0131-6141-2023-84-5-56-68
Views:
303
Email this article 