Interpreting and Explaining Historical Texts – Is it Possible?

Open access

Abstract

With reference to particular problems of interpretations that radio listeners of today are likely to encounter when listening to a Norwegian radio reportage from the 1930s, this article discusses the question of whether it is possible for present-day readers/viewers/ listeners or text analysts to understand texts from the past in the way that they were originally meant to be understood. It is argued that we need to gain some kind of access to the contexts that once engendered the texts if we are to arrive at historically acceptable interpretations and explanations of them. The article suggests a solution to the problem of historical text analysis, namely historical context reconstruction. This solution is concretised in terms of a specific methodology, which has here been used for research on the formation and first development of the genre system of Norwegian radio. This methodology involves the application of three different text-context models for discourse-analytical purposes:

1. Halliday’s structural correlation model

2. The multistratal realisation model developed within social semiotics

3. Goffman’s frame model.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Barthes R. (1969 [1967]) Elements of Semiology (French original: Éléments de Sémiologie (1964). Translated by J. Cape Ltd. London: The Chaucer Press.

  • Berge K.L. (1993) ‘The Diachrony of Textual Norms; or Why Do Genres Change? A Presentation of a Theory Illustrated by its Relevance for the Teaching of Writing’ Changing English 1(1993)1: 217-228. University of London: Department of English Media and Education Institute of Education

  • Berge K.L. & E. Maagerø (eds.) (2005) Semiotics from the North. Nordic Approaches to Systemic Functional Linguistics. Oslo: Novus.

  • Bhatia V.K. (1993) Analysing Genre: Language Use in Professional Settings. London & New York: Longman.

  • Dahl H.F. (2004) Mediehistorie: Historisk metode i mediefaget. Oslo: Damm.

  • Du Bois J. S. Schuetze-Coburn; D. Paolino & S. Cumming (1991) Discourse Transcription. University of California Santa Barbara. Unpublished manuscript.

  • Du Bois J.; S. Schuetze-Coburn; S. Cumming & D. Paolino (1993) ‘Outline of Discourse Transcription’ in J.A. Edwards & M.D. Lampert (1992) Talking Data. Transcription and Coding in Discourse Research. Hillsdale New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

  • Du Bois John W. (1991) ‘Transcription Design Principles for Spoken Discourse Research’ Pragmatics 1 (1): 71-106.

  • Fairclough N. (1989) Language and Power. London & New York: Longman.

  • Goffman E. 1986 [1974]) Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Boston: Northeastern University Press.

  • Halliday M.A.K. (1990 [1978]) Language as Social Semiotic. The Social Interpretation of Language and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.

  • Hanssen E.; E. H. Jahr; T. Hoel; O. Rekdal & G. Wiggen (1978) Oslomål. Talemålsundersøkelsen i Oslo (TAUS). Hovedrapport. Oslo: Novus.

  • Itkonen E. (1978) Grammatical Theory and Metascience: A Critical Investigation Into the Methodological and Philosophical Foundations of “Autonomous” Linguistics. Amsterdam Studies in the Theory and History of Linguistic Science. Series 4 Current Issues in Linguistic Theory Vol. 5. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

  • Jordheim H. (2001) Lesningens vitenskap. Utkast til en ny filologi. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

  • Kjelstadli K. (2000 [1992]) Fortida er ikke hva den var. En innføring i historiefaget. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.

  • Kress G. & T. van Leeuwen (1996) Reading Images: The Grammar of Visual Design. London: Routledge.

  • Martin J.R. (1992) English Text. System and Structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

  • Matthiessen C. (1993) ‘Register in the Round: Diversity in a Unified Theory of Register Analysis’ in M. Ghadessy (ed.) Register Analysis. Theory and Practice. London & New York: Pinter Publishers.

  • Rüppel I. (2002) ‘Writing the History of Texts: A Historian’s Perspective’ in K.L. Berge (ed.) Teksthistorie. Tekstvitenskapelige bidrag. Sakprosa - skrifter fra prosjektmiljøet Norsk Sakprosa No. 6. Oslo: Norsk faglitterær forfatterforening.

  • Scannell P. (1996) Radio Television & Modern Life. Oxford: Blackwell.

  • Teleman U. (1974) Manual för grammatisk beskrivning av talad och skriven svenska. Lund: Studentlitteratur.

  • Vagle W. (1990) Radiospråket - talt eller skrevet? Syntaktiske og pragmatiske tilnærminger i semiotisk perspektiv. Oslo: Novus.

  • Vagle W. (1995) ’Kritisk tekstanalyse’ in J. Svennevig M. Sandvik & W. Vagle: Tilnærminger til tekst. Modeller for språklig tekstanalyse. Oslo: Cappelen Akademisk Forlag.

  • Vagle W. (2002) ’The Diachronicity of Text Norms. A Theory of Genre Formation and Change - Illustrated with Examples from the Text History of Norwegian Radio’ in K.L. Berge (ed.) Teksthistorie. Tekstvitenskapelige bidrag. Sakprosa - skrifter fra prosjektmiljøet Norsk Sakprosa No. 6. Oslo: Norsk faglitterær forfatterforening.

  • Vagle W. (2005) ‘From Text-context Models to Discourse-analytical Methodologies - Three Perspectives on Radio Discourse’ in: K.L. Berge & E. Maagerø (eds.): Semiotics from the North. Nordic Spproaches to Systemic Functional Linguistics. Oslo: Novus.

  • Vagle W. (2006) (forthcoming). ”I Think the Listeners Would Like Me to Ask You Mr Prime Minister …”. The History of Texts and Contexts in Norwegian Radio with Emphasis on the Early Period. Dissertation submitted for the degree of dr. philos. University of Oslo Faculty of Arts

  • van Leeuwen T. (1999) Speech Music Sound. Basingstoke: Macmillan.

  • van Leeuwen T. (2005) Introducing Social Semiotics. London: Routledge.

  • Ventola E. (1987) The Structure of Social Interaction. A Systemic Approach to the Semiotics of Service Encounters. London: Pinter Publishers.

  • Wales K. (1989) A Dictionary of Stylistics. London & New York: Longman.

Search
Journal information
Impact Factor


CiteScore 2018: 0.54

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.223
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.270


Cited By
Metrics
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 129 83 2
PDF Downloads 68 53 1