Literary theory across genre chains: intertextual traces in reading/writing/talking literary theory in the high school classroom

References

• Anderson, P. 1976. Considerations of Western Marxism. New York: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Appleman, D. 2014. Critical Encounters in Secondary English: Teaching Literacy Theory to Adolescents. New York: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ashley, H., and H. Lynn. 2003. “Ventriloquism 001: How to Throw Your Voice in the Academy.” Journal of Basic Writing 22: 4–26.
   Google Scholar
• Aukerman, M., and L. C. Schuldt. 2016. “Closely Reading ‘Reading Closely.’.” Language Arts 93: 286.
   Google Scholar
• Bakhtin, M. 1981. “Discourse in The Novel.” In The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays, edited by M. Holquist, 259–422. Austin, TX: University of Texas
   Google Scholar
• Bakhtin, M. 1981. The Dialogic Imagination: Four Essays. Translated by C. Emerson and M. Holquist. Austin, TX: University of Texas.
   Google Scholar
• Bakhtin, M. 1984. Problems of Dostoevsky’s Poetics. Translated and edited by C. Emerson. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.
   Google Scholar
• Bakhtin, M. M. 2010. “The Problem of Speech Genres.” In C. Emerson & M. Holquist (eds.,). Speech Genres and Other Late Essays, 60–102. Austin: University of Texas Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bauman, R., and C. L. Briggs. 1990. “Poetics and Performance as Critical Perspectives on Language and Social Life.” Annual Review of Anthropology 19: 59–88. doi:10.1146/annurev.an.19.100190.000423.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bauman, Z. 2000. Liquid Modernity. New York: Polity.
   Google Scholar
• Beach, R., and T. Swiss. 2011. “Literary Theories and Teaching of English Language Arts.” In Handbook of Research on Teaching the English Language Arts, 3rd ed, edited by D. Lapp and D. Fisher, 157–163. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Blommaert, J. 2013. “Writing as a Sociolinguistic Object.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 17 (4): 440–459. doi:10.1111/josl.2013.17.issue-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blommaert, J., J. Collins, and S. Slembrouck. 2005. “Polycentricity and Interactional Regimes in ‘Global Neighborhoods’.” Ethnography 6 (2): 205–235. doi:10.1177/1466138105057557.
   Google Scholar
• Bloome, D., and A. Egan-Robertson. 1993. “The Social Construction of Intertextuality in Classroom Reading and Writing Lessons.” Reading Research Quarterly 28 (4): 304–333. doi:10.2307/747928.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bloome, D., and A. Egan-Robertson. 1993. ““The Social Construction Of Intertextuality in Classroom Reading and Writing Lessons.” Reading Research Quarterly 28 (4): 304-333.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Burgess, A., and R. Ivanic. 2010. “Writing and Being Written: Issues of Identity across Timescales.” Written Communication 27 (2): 228–255. doi:10.1177/0741088310363447.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Camus, A. 1958. The Guest. New York: Creative Education.
   Google Scholar
• Chouliaraki, L., and N. Fairclough. 1999. Discourse in Late Modernity: Rethinking Critical Discourse Analysis. Edinburgh, UK: University of Edinburgh.
   Google Scholar
• Comaroff, J., and J. L. Comaroff. 2000. “Millennial Capitalism: First Thoughts on a Second Coming.” Public Culture 12 (2): 291–343. doi:10.1215/08992363-12-2-291.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Damico, J. S., G. Campano, and J. C. Harste. 2009. “Transactional Theory and Critical Theory in Reading Comprehension.” In Handbook of Research on Reading Comprehension, edited by S. Israel and G. Duffy, 177–188. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dixon, C., and J. Green. 2005. “Studying the Discursive Construction of Texts in Classrooms through Interactional Ethnography.” In Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Literacy Research, edited by R. Beach, J. Green, M. Kamil, and T. Shanahan, 349–390. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
   Google Scholar
• Duff, P. A. 2003. “Intertextuality and Hybrid Discourses: The Infusion of Pop Culture in Educational Discourse.” Linguistics and Education 14 (3–4): 231–276. doi:10.1016/j.linged.2004.02.005.
   Google Scholar
• Eagleton, T. 1983. Literary Theory. London: Basil Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Eagleton, T. 2003. After Theory. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Eckert, L. S. 2008. “Bridging the Pedagogical Gap: Intersections between Literary and Reading Theories in Secondary and Postsecondary Literacy Instruction.” Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 52 (2): 110–118. doi:10.1598/JAAL.52.2.2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fairclough, N. 2003. Analyzing Discourse: Textual Analysis for Social Research. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Fairclough, N. 2004. “Critical Discourse Analysis in Researching Language in the New Capitalism: Overdeterminism, Transdisciplinarity, and Textual Analysis.” In Systemic Functions Linguistics and Critical Discourse Analysis: Studies in Social Change, edited by L. Young and C. Harrison, 103–122. London: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Faivre, R. 2016. “Jameson’s Spiritual Reawakening: Labor Theory in the Time of Wal-Mart.” Minnesota Review 86 (1): 149–159.
   Google Scholar
• Furet, F. 2000. The Passing of an Illusion: The Idea of Communism in the Twentieth Century. Translated by D. Furet. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
   Google Scholar
• Goff, B., and R. Rish. 2019. “What’s Brought along and Brought About.” Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction. online first.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green, J. L., and L. A. Meyer. 1991. “The Embeddness of Reading in Classroom Life: Reading as a Situated Process.” In Towards a Critical Sociology of Reading Pedagogy, edited by C. Baker and A. Luke, 141–160. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Hines, M. B., and D. Appleman. 2000. “Multiple Ways of Knowing in Literature Classrooms.” English Education 32: 141–168.
   Google Scholar
• Hull, G. T. 2017. “Notes on a Marxist Interpretation of Black American Literature.” African American Review 50 (4): 591–596. doi:10.1353/afa.2017.0104.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hunt, C. S., and M. Seiver. 2018. “Social Class Matters: Class Identities and Discourses in Educational Contexts.” Educational Review 70 (3): 342–357. doi:10.1080/00131911.2017.1316240.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hurley, D. F. 1993. “Looking for the Arab: Reading the Readings of Camus’s “The Guest”.” Studies in Short Fiction 30: 79–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, T. S., L. Thompson, P. Smagorinsky, and P. G. Fry. 2003. “Learning to Teach the Five-paragraph Theme.” Research in the Teaching of English 38: 136–176.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones, S. 2013. “Critical Literacies in the Making: Social Class and Identities in the Early Reading Classroom.” Journal of Early Childhood Literacy 13 (2): 197–224. doi:10.1177/1468798411430102.
   Google Scholar
• Juzwik, M. M., C. Borsheim-Black, S. Caughlan, and A. Heintz. 2013. Inspiring Dialogue: Talking to Learn in the English Classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.
   Google Scholar
• Juzwik, M. M., J. VanDerHeide, M. B. Dunn, and B. Goff. 2018. “Assigning and Framing Argument Writing to Foreground Significance: Comparing Three Approaches in Secondary English.” English in Education 52 (3): 186–199. doi:10.1080/04250494.2018.1505413.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamberelis, G., and K. D. Scott. 2004. “Other People’s Voices: The Coarticulation of Texts and Subjectivities.” In Uses of Intertextuality in Classroom and Educational Research, edited by N. Shuart-Faris and D. Bloome, 201–250. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
   Google Scholar
• Knoeller, C. 1998. Voicing Ourselves: Whose Words We Use When We Talk about Books. Albany, NY: SUNY Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lillis, T., and C. McKinney. 2013. “The Sociolinguistics of Writing in a Global Context: Objects, Lenses, Consequences.” Journal of Sociolinguistics 17 (4): 415–439. doi:10.1111/josl.2013.17.issue-4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maybin, J. 2017. “Textual Trajectories: Theoretical Roots and Institutional Consequences (Pre-publication Version).” Text & Talk 37 (4): 1–16. doi:10.1515/text-2017-0011.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morson, G. S. 1991. “Bakhtin, Genres, and Temporality.” New Literary History 22 (4): 1071–1092. doi:10.2307/469079.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morson, G. S. 2007. “Bakhtin and the Teaching of Literature.” Research in the Teaching of English 41: 350–357.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morson, G. S., and C. Emerson. 1990. Mikhail Bakhtin: Creation of a Prosaics. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Muhlestein, D. 1999. “A Teacher and His Student: Subversion and Containment in Camus’ “The Guest”.” Studies in Short Fiction 36: 223–234.
   Google Scholar
• Newell, G. E., D. Bloome, and A. Hirvela. 2015. Teaching and Learning Argumentative Writing in High School English Language Arts Classrooms. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Oddo, J. 2013. “Discourse-based Methods across Texts and Semiotic Modes: Three Tools for Micro-rhetorical Analysis.” Written Communication 30 (3): 236–275. doi:10.1177/0741088313488071.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pace, B. G. 2006. “Between Response and Interpretation: Ideological Becoming and Literacy Events in Critical Readings of Literature.” Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 49 (7): 584–594. doi:10.1598/JAAL.49.7.4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phelan, J., edited by. 1999. Young Adult Literature and The New Literary Theories. New York: Teachers College Press, .
   Google Scholar
• Prior, P. 1991. “Contextualizing Writing and Response in a Graduate Seminar.” Written Communication 8 (3): 267–310. doi:10.1177/0741088391008003001.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rampton, B. 2006. Language in Late Modernity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rampton, B. 2017. “Interactional Sociolinguistics.” Working Papers in Urban Language & Literacies, Paper 201, 1–16.
   Google Scholar
• Ritty, J. 1988. “Bonsai.” The Centennial Review 32: 278.
   Google Scholar
• Short, K. G. 2004. “Researching Intertextuality within Collaborative Classroom Environments.” In Uses of Intertextuality in Classroom and Educational Research, edited by N. Shuart-Faris and D. Bloome, 373–396. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
   Google Scholar
• Shuart-Faris, N., and D. Bloome, Eds. 2004. Uses of Intertextuality in Classroom and Educational Research. Greenwich, CT: Information Age.
   Google Scholar
• Silverstein, M. 2005. “Axes of Evals: Token versus Type Interdiscursivity.” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 15 (1): 6–22. doi:10.1525/jlin.2005.15.issue-1.
   Google Scholar
• Silverstein, M., and G. Urban, Eds. 1996. Natural Histories of Discourse. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stornaiuolo, A., and M. Hall. 2014. “Tracing Resonance.” In Methodological Challenges When Exploring Digital Learning Spaces in Education, edited by G. B. Gudmundsdottir and K. B. Vasbo, 29–43. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense.
   Google Scholar
• Stornaiuolo, A., A. Smith, and N. C. Phillips. 2017. “Developing a Transliteracies Framework for a Connected World.” Journal of Literacy Research 49 (1): 68–91. doi:10.1177/1086296X16683419.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stornaiuolo, A., and R. J. LeBlanc. 2016. “Scaling as a Literacy Activity: Mobility and Educational Inequality in an Age Of Global Connectivity.” Research in The Teaching Of English 50 (3): 263-287.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tannen, D. 2007. Talking Voices: Repetition, Dialogue, and Imagery in Conversational Discourse. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Thein, A. H., M. Guise, and D. L. Sloan. 2012. “Exploring the Significance of Social Class Identity Performance in the English Classroom.” English Education 44: 215–253.
   Google Scholar
• VanDerHeide, J. 2018. “Classroom Talk as Writing Instruction for Learning to Make Writing Moves in Literary Arguments.” Reading Research Quarterly 53 (3): 323–344. doi:10.1002/rrq.2018.53.issue-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Volosinov, V. N. 1986. Marxism and the Philosophy of Language. Translated by L. Matejka and I.R. Titunik. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wa Thiong’o, N. 2014. Globalectics. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wertsch, J. V. 1993. Voices of the Mind: Sociocultural Approach to Mediated Action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Weyland, L., B. Goff, and G. Newell. 2018. “The Social Construction of Warranting Evidence in Two Classrooms.” Journal of Literacy Research 50 (1): 97–122. doi:10.1177/1086296X17751173.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wortham, S. 2002. “Linguistic Anthropology of Education: An Introduction.” In Linguistic Anthropology of Education, edited by S. Wortham and B. Rymes, 1–30. Westport, CT: Praeger.
   Google Scholar
• Wynhoff Olsen, A., J. VanDerHeide, B. Goff, and M. B. Dunn. 2018. “Examining Intertextual Connections in Written Arguments: A Study of Student Writing as Social Participation and Response.” Written Communication 35 (1): 58–88. doi:10.1177/0741088317739557.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar