<b>Speech genre interpretative question as a tool for the teaching of reading

  • Guilherme Rocha Duran Universidade Federal de São Carlos
  • Renilson José Menegassi Universidade Estadual de Maringá
Keywords: speech genre, interpretative question, learning tool

Abstract

Since the learning of interpretation is disregarded within schooling, it contradicts the theoretical propositions of the interactive concept of language. The typical speech genres of schooling, such as questions, are not formally taught. Current paper introduces the speech genre Interpretative Question as a learning tool for interpretation, due to its collaborative production between interlocutors for the production of question- and answer-texts. Analysis is foregrounded on the theories of Applied Linguistics, based on the theoretical orientation by the Bakhtin Circle for the interaction concept of language, on its concepts of speech genres and on the theoretical and methodological orientation of Dialogic Discourse Analysis. Current paper is also based on research by Menegassi, Sobral, Fiorin, Travaglia, Rojo and others. The corpus of current analysis comprises a question-text and an answer-text produced by teachers in initial formation in the first year of the undergraduate course of Language and Literature at the University of the State at Maringá, Maringá, Brazil. Results show that interpretation represents the interaction between the subject who produces it and his interlocutor(s), represented by the texts recovered within the interpretation. Social interaction is produced through interpretation and validates the Interpretative Question as a learning tool at this stage of reading.

 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...
Published
2016-04-27
How to Cite
Duran, G. R., & Menegassi, R. J. (2016). <b&gt;Speech genre interpretative question as a tool for the teaching of reading. Acta Scientiarum. Language and Culture, 38(2), 117-127. https://doi.org/10.4025/actascilangcult.v38i2.26434
Section
Linguistics

 

0.1
2019CiteScore
 
 
45th percentile
Powered by  Scopus

 

 

0.1
2019CiteScore
 
 
45th percentile
Powered by  Scopus