It is now widely maintained that the concept of "literariness " has been critically examined and found deficient. Prominent postmodern literary theorists have argued that there are no special characteristics that distinguish literature from other texts. Similarly, cognitive psychology has often subsumed literary understanding within a general theory of discourse processing. However, a review of empirical studies of literary readers reveals traces of literariness that appear irreducible to either of these explanatory frameworks. Our analysis of readers ' responses to several literary texts (short stories and poems) indicates processes beyond the explanatory reach of current situation models. Such findings suggest a three-component model of literariness involving foregrounded textual or narrative features, readers ' defamiliarizing responses to them, and the consequent modification of personal meanings. What sort of activity is the reading of literature? There are several possible answers to
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Miall et al. (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 3 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: