Cover not available

Article published In: Empirical Studies of Literariness
Edited by Massimo Salgaro and Paul Sopčák
[Scientific Study of Literature 8:1] 2018
► pp. 77–113

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Citation analysis

An empirical approach to professional literary interpretation

 | Regis University
Published online: 17 January 2019
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ssol.17009.bru
Abstract
This paper presents series of historiometric studies that exemplify the value of “citation analysis” as an empirical approach to professional literary-critical interpretation, especially with respect to the question of the “literariness” of literary texts. Specifically, the studies show that professional interpreters of Wordsworth’s poetry, across more than a century of time and despite widely varying critical approaches, tend to pay more attention to and therefore more frequently cite lines that involve prospective enjambments. Lines involving nominative noun phrase and retrospective enjambments, however, did not reveal the same correlation with frequency of citation. The studies thus suggest that literariness does indeed have a relatively stable textual component that may be discriminated through citation analysis of professional interpretations of individual literary texts by authors writing in distinct genres of literature and in different periods in literary history.
Article outline
  • Methods and results
    • Citation analysis of “Stepping Westward”
      • Method
      • Results
    • Citation analysis of “To Joanna” and “To My Sister”
      • Method
      • Results
    • Citation analysis of “The Last of the Flock”
      • Method
      • Results
  • Discussion
    • Discussion of the results
    • Discussion of the method
      • Prospects for citation analysis
    • Strengths of citation analysis
      • Ecological validity
      • Requires and refines literary-critical expertise
    • Limitations of the citation analyses reported here
      • Not normed
      • Insufficient control for interaction effects
  • Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
References (56)
References
Allington, D. (2012). Private experience, textual analysis, and institutional authority: The discursive practice of critical interpretation and its enactment in literary training. Language and Literature, 21(2), 211–225. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Attridge, D. (2013). Moving words: Forms of English poetry. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bálint, K., Hakemulder, F., Kuijpers, M., Doicaru, M., & Tan, E. S. (2016). Reconceptualizing foregrounding: Identifying response strategies to deviation in absorbing narratives. Scientific Study of Literature, 16(2), 176–207. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Beatty, A. (1922). William Wordsworth: His doctrine and art in their historical relations. Madison: University of Wisconsin Studies in Language and Literature 17.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blohm, S., Menninghaus, W., & Schlesewsky, M. (2017). Sentence-level effects of literary genre: Behavioral and electrophysical evidence. Frontiers in Psychology, 81. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bohrn, I. C., Altmann, U., Lubrich, O., Menninghaus, W., & Jacobs, A. M. (2012). Old proverbs in new skins – An fMRI study on defamiliarization. Frontiers in Psychology, 31, 1–18. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2013). When we like what we know – A parametric fMRI analysis of beauty and familiarity. Brain & Language, 1241, 1–8. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bourdieu, P. (1993). The field of cultural production: Essays on art and literature. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brooke, S. A. (1920). Naturalism in English poetry. London, United Kingdom: J. M. Dent.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bruhn, M. J. (2017). ‘The history and science of feeling’: Wordsworth’s affective poetics, then and now. In Wehrs, D. R., & Blake, T. (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of affect studies and textual criticism (pp. 671–693). Cham, Switzerland: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(in progress). Philosophy, methodology, and theory development in the scientific study of literary response, experience, and interpretation.
Coleridge, S. T. (2000). The major works, including Biographia Literaria. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dolin, S. (1993). Enjambment and the erotics of the gaze in Williams’s poetry. American Imago, 50(1). Retrieved from [URL]
Fialho, O., Zyngier, S. & Miall, D. S. (2011). Interpretation and experience: Two pedagogical interventions observed. English in Education, 45(3), 236–253. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fish, S. (1980). Is there a text in this class? The authority of interpretive communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fowler, A. (1991). The two histories. In Perkins, D. (Ed.), Theoretical issues in literary history (pp. 114–130). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fowler, R. (1966). ‘Prose rhythm’ and ‘meter’. In Fowler, R. (Ed.), Essays on Style and Language (pp. 82–99). New York, NY: Humanities Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Freeman, D. C. (1968). On the primes of metrical style. Language and Style, 11, 63–101.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Golomb, H. (1979). Enjambment in poetry: Language and verse in interaction. Tel Aviv, Israel: Porter Institute.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hanauer, D. I. (1998). Reading poetry: An empirical investigation of formalist, stylistic, and conventionalist claims. Poetics Today, 19(4), 565–580. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2011). The scientific study of poetic writing. Scientific Study of Literature, 1(1), 79–87. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heiden, B. (2014). Narrative in poetry: A problem of narrative theory. Narrative, 22(2), 269–283. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Heller, J. R. (1977). Enjambment as a metrical force in romantic conversation poems. Poetics, 61, 15–25. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hogan, P. C. (2011). Affective narratology: The emotional structure of stories. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hollander, J. (1975). Vision and resonance: Two senses of poetic form. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015b). Neurocognitive poetics: methods and models for investigating the neuronal and cognitive-affective bases of literature reception. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 91. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2015c). Towards a neurocognitive poetics model of literary reading. In Williams, R. M. (Ed.), Cognitive Neuroscience of Natural Language Use (pp. 135–159). Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jacobs, A. M., Lüdtke, J., Aryani, A., Meyer-Sickendieck, B., & Conrad, M. (2016). Mood-empathic and aesthetic responses in poetry reception: A model-guided, multilevel, multimethod approach. Scientific Study of Literature, 6(1), 87–130. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Koops van’t Jagt, R., Hoeks, J. C. J., Dorleijn, G., & Hendriks, P. (2014). Look before you leap: How enjambment affects the processing of poetry. Scientific Study of Literature, 4(1), 3–24. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leech, G. N. (1969). A linguistic guide to English poetry. London, United Kingdom: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Logan, J. V. (1961). Wordsworthian criticism: A guide and bibliography. Columbus: Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Margolin, U. (2008). Studying literature and being empirical: A multifaceted conjunction. In Zyngier, S., Bortolussi, M., Chesnokova, A., & Auracher, J. (Eds.), Directions in empirical literary studies (pp. 8–19). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Menninghaus, W., Bohrn, I. C., Knoop, C. A., Kotz, S. A., Schlotz, W., & Jacobs, A. M. (2015). Rhetorical features facilitate prosodic processing while handicapping ease of semantic comprehension. Cognition, 1431, 48–60. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miall, D. S. (2006). Literary reading: Empirical and theoretical studies. New York, NY: Peter Lang.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2011). Science in the perspective of literariness. Scientific Study of Literature, 1(1), 7–14. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Miall, D. S., & Kuiken, D. (1994). Foregrounding, defamiliarization, and affect: Response to literary stories. Poetics, 221, 389–407. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1999). What is literariness? Three components of literary reading. Discourse Processes, 28(2), 121–138. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Simonton, D. K. (1989). Shakespeare’s sonnets: The case of and for single-case historiometry. Journal of Personality, 57(3), 695–721. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1990). Lexical choices and aesthetic success: A computer content analysis of 154 Shakespeare sonnets. Computers and the Humanities, 24(4), 251–264.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Peer, W. (1986). Stylistics and psychology: Investigations of foregrounding. London, United Kingdom: Croom Helm.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2007). Introduction to foregrounding: A state of the art. Language and Literature, 16(2), 99–104. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Peer, W., Hakemulder, F., & Zyngier, S. (2007). Lines on feeling: Foregrounding, aesthetics and meaning. Language and Literature, 16(2), 197–213. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Peer, W., Hakemulder, F. & Zyngier, S. (2012). Scientific methods for the humanities. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Williams, W. C. (1923). Spring and all. Dijon, France: Robert McAlmon.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wordsworth, W. (1983). Poems, in two volumes, and other poems, 1800–1807. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1992). Lyrical ballads, and other poems, 1797–1800. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wuescher, H. J. (1980). Liberty, equality, fraternity in Wordsworth, 1791–1800. Stockholm, Sweden: Uppsala University.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zöllner, K. (1990). “Quotation analysis” as a means of understanding comprehension processes of longer and more difficult texts. Poetics, 191, 293–322. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zwaan, R. A. (1991). Some parameters of literary and news comprehension: Effects of discourse-type perspective on reading rate and surface structure representation. Poetics, 20(2) 139–156. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1993). Aspects of literary comprehension. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (4)

Cited by four other publications

Bruhn, Mark J.
2022. Frame shifting and fictive motion in Shelley’s poetic sublime. Journal of Literary Semantics 51:2 ► pp. 93 ff. DOI logo
Mancing, Howard & Jennifer Marston William
2022. Cognitive Literary Studies. In Restoring the Human Context to Literary and Performance Studies [Cognitive Studies in Literature and Performance, ], ► pp. 325 ff. DOI logo
Kuiken, Don & Shawn Douglas
2018. Living metaphor as the site of bidirectional literary engagement. Scientific Study of Literature 8:1 ► pp. 47 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2023. A Life with Poetry [Linguistic Approaches to Literature, 41], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue