Making the subtle difference: literature and non-literature in the classroom
做出微妙的差异：课堂上的文学和非文学

Stylistics holds most of its influence in and because of the language classroom. The practical outlook of most stylisticians arises from a long tradition of using literature in the context of language teaching, and innovations in such pedagogy in turn have generated a wealth of stylistic approaches and a rich set of analyses. The work done by students and new researchers in the field - perhaps more than in any other branch of literary study - are regarded as valuable contributions to the discipline. In this chapter, Guy Cook deploys a range of text-types, including literature, in order to make an argument about ideology and canonisation. In its interactive style; the chapter enacts its own discursive creativity. In drawing continuities between advertising and literary discourse, Cook argues for students thinking critically about canon and syllabus, and yet also argues for the value of literature and literary study.
文体学在语言课堂中占有大部分影响力。大多数文体学家的实用观点源于在语言教学中使用文学的悠久传统，而这种教学法的创新反过来又产生了丰富的文体方法和丰富的分析。该领域的学生和新研究人员所做的工作——也许比文学研究的任何其他分支都多——被认为是对该学科的宝贵贡献。在本章中，盖伊·库克 （Guy Cook） 部署了一系列文本类型，包括文学，以便对意识形态和经典化进行论证。在其互动风格中;本章实施了自己的话语创造力。在广告和文学话语之间划定连续性时，库克主张学生批判性地思考经典和教学大纲，但也主张文学和文学研究的价值。

Further work on the use of stylistics as pedagogy can be found in Brumfit and Garter (1986), Widdowson (1992), Carter and McRae (1996), Short (1996), Simpson (1997) and Watson and Zyngier (2007).
关于使用文体学作为教学法的进一步研究可以在 Brumfit 和 Garter （1986）、Widdowson （1992）、Carter 和 McRae （1996）、Short （1996）、Simpson （1997） 以及 Watson 和 Zyngier （2007） 中找到。

THERE IS IN BRITAIN a continuing undercurrent of disagreement about the teaching of literature, which surfaces from time to time in bitter and stronglyworded debate. The debate is between those who defend, as the only source of texts for literary study, that set of classics referred to as the canon, and those who argue that many of the texts in this canon are irrelevant to contemporary students, who should rather busy themselves with learning to cope with the vast arrat of gerires in the modern world: including such non-literary discourse as information leaflets, news bulletins, newspapers and open ones whose values, though allowed to change, are repeatedly chosen and re-chosen by their populations, as the literary canon can be chosen and re-chosen by its readers. And, if the analogy holds, one might add that people are frequently fondest of their native country when they are away from it. Pursuing this analogy, what I am advocating is allowing the citizens of literature classes a trip abroad in the belief (perhaps
在英国，关于文学教学的分歧暗流持续存在，不时在激烈而措辞强烈的辩论中出现。争论的一方是捍卫这套被称为经典经典的经典著作，将其作为文学研究的唯一来源，另一方则认为这部经典中的许多文本与当代学生无关，他们应该忙于学习应对现代世界的大量经典： 包括诸如信息传单、新闻公告、报纸和公开话语等非文学话语，这些话语的价值观虽然可以改变，但其价值观会被其人民反复选择和重新选择，就像文学经典可以被读者选择和重新选择一样。而且，如果这个类比成立，人们可能会补充说，当人们远离祖国时，他们往往最喜欢它。追寻这个类比，我所倡导的是允许文学阶层的公民在信仰中出国旅行（也许
mistaken) that most will return. What this means in practice is a syllabus which is a mixture: a mixture of canonised literary works with the non-literary or the sub-literary. There will inevitably be some intermarriages and offspring of mixed parenthood, some change of citizenship too - with some of which the teacher will inevitably disagree. But the overall situation is a good one: active, and stimulating the kind of atmosphere in which literature and literary appreciation can thrive.
错误），大多数人会回来。这在实践中意味着一个混合的教学大纲：经典文学作品与非文学或次文学作品的混合。不可避免地会有一些通婚和混血儿的后代，也会有一些公民身份的变化——其中一些老师不可避免地会不同意。但总体情况是好的：积极向上，并激发了文学和文学欣赏可以蓬勃发展的氛围。

The strategy of mixing the literary, the non-literary and the sub-literary has the advantage of deterring the idea implicit in many literature courses that literature is a use of language somehow unaffected by the staggering technological changes in the uses of language which have taken place this century. (The details and timing vary from place to place, but the technological revolution has affected almost all societies to a greater or lesser extent.) Just as the nature of language was fundamentally altered by the advent of writing and print, so over the last century or so our relationship to language has also changed under the impact of a series of new technologies (photograph, telephone, tape recorder, radio, film, television, video, computer) which, while not usurping (so far) the dominant use and status of print, have nevertheless altered the nature of our relationship to it. As literature is a discourse whose mode is writing or print (the very word derives from the Latin littera, a letter of the alphabet), this change cannot but affect our relationship to literature too. This has happened, I believe, in one of two ways.
将文学、非文学和次文学混合的策略的好处是阻止了许多文学课程中隐含的观念，即文学是一种语言的使用，在某种程度上不受本世纪发生的语言使用惊人技术变化的影响。（细节和时间因地而异，但技术革命或多或少地影响了几乎所有社会。正如文字和印刷品的出现从根本上改变了语言的性质一样，在上个世纪左右的时间里，我们与语言的关系在一系列新技术（照片、电话、录音机、收音机、电影、电视、视频、计算机）的影响下也发生了变化，这些技术虽然没有篡夺（到目前为止）印刷品的主导用途和地位， 尽管如此，它们还是改变了我们与它的关系的性质。由于文学是一种以写作或印刷为模式的话语（这个词本身源自拉丁语 littera，字母表中的一个字母），这种变化也不能不影响我们与文学的关系。我相信，这是以两种方式之一发生的。

Firstly (most obviously but ultimately least significantly) there are ways in which these technologies have usurped some of the uses of print. For a reason about which no satisfactory theory has ever been advanced, people seem universally to take delight in, or even need, the narration of fictional events (Beaugrande 1987). This need, fulfilled so often in print, has in many people’s lives been taken over (in whole or part) by radio, television, video and film, in all of which media an extraordinary high proportion of time is given over to the depiction of fictional events. On one weekday evening selected at random, for example, I estimate $42\mathrm{\%}$$42\mathrm{\%}$42%42 \% of all television broadcasting on the four British terrestrial channels between 5.30 pm and 1.00 am to be taken up by fiction.
首先（最明显但最终最不重要）这些技术以多种方式篡夺了印刷品的某些用途。由于一个从未提出过令人满意的理论的原因，人们似乎普遍喜欢甚至需要虚构事件的叙述（Beaugrande 1987）。这种需求经常在印刷品中得到满足，在许多人的生活中已经被广播、电视、视频和电影（全部或部分）所取代，在所有这些媒体中，都花费了极高比例的时间来描述虚构事件。例如，在随机选择的工作日晚上，我估计 $42\mathrm{\%}$$42\mathrm{\%}$42%42 \% 在下午 5：30 到 1：00 之间，四个英国地面频道的所有电视广播都被小说占据了。

Secondly, since the widespread availability of the computer, the nature of our experience of the written word is altered, not so much because new technologies replace the use of print but because they make its dissemination both easier and faster. (In this sense their effect on a literate culture is more comparable to the replacement of handwriting by print than to the addition of writing to speech.) It is often forgotten, in the discussion of a ‘computer culture’, and the expression of fears for its detrimental effect on literacy, that the most widespread uses of computers involve writing.
其次，自从计算机的广泛使用以来，我们对书面文字的体验性质发生了变化，与其说是因为新技术取代了印刷品的使用，不如说是因为它们使它的传播变得更容易和更快。（从这个意义上说，它们对识字文化的影响更类似于用印刷品取代手写，而不是在语音中增加文字。在讨论“计算机文化”以及表达对其对识字的有害影响的恐惧中，人们经常忘记计算机最广泛的用途是写作。

Computers bring us more written language rather than less; but their effect on our experiences of those written words may nevertheless be large. Word processing a manuscript is a very different linguistic activity from writing it by hand or typing. The ease of correction and redrafting adduces quite different creative processes (not always with better results); electronic mail and computer networking, though written, encourage an on-line interactivity quite unlike that in a time-consuming exchange of letters; desk-top. publishing, by making print runs both cheaper and faster, leads to an increase in numbers of publications (not necessarily a desirable outcome, as works of quality may become lost in an increase in quantity). These are changes in the production of writing. On the side of reception, the existence of the book as a physical object, so integral to many people’s experience of literature, may be continuously eroded. Texts may be handled
计算机为我们带来了更多的书面语言，而不是更少的书面语言;但它们对我们这些书面文字的体验的影响可能仍然很大。手稿的文字处理是一种与手写或打字截然不同的语言活动。更正和重新起草的便利性引发了完全不同的创作过程（并不总是有更好的结果）;电子邮件和计算机网络虽然是书面的，但鼓励一种在线互动，这与耗时的信件交流完全不同;桌面。出版通过使印刷运行更便宜、更快，导致出版物数量的增加（不一定是理想的结果，因为高质量的作品可能会因数量的增加而丢失）。这些是写作生产的变化。在接受方面，书籍作为物理对象的存在，对许多人的文学体验如此不可或缺，可能会不断被侵蚀。可以处理文本
more and more on screen; the libraries of the future will allow the retrieval of reading matter on a screen as friendly to the eyes as a page of print.
越来越多的人出现在屏幕上;未来的图书馆将允许在像印刷品一样对眼睛友好的屏幕上检索阅读材料。

What effect should this new environment have upon the teaching of literature? Clearly it should have some effect. The worst response possible would be to continue as though nothing had happened, as though books were a unique means of disseminating linguistic art. The increased quantity of print made possible by new technology entails a greater need for selectivity by the individual. One of the most important skills for the contemporary language and literature student is to know what not to read. In a chirographic culture only the most valued texts are copied; in a print culture the range widens (hence the novel, [… and also] the song and jingle, the romance and the soap opera. A further contradiction is that these newer, ‘lower’ genres are often recalled with more pleasure and accuracy than the supposedly ‘higher’ genres of the literary canon, while the attachment which this pleasure and knowledge would seem to indicate is șimultaneously denied. The junior branches are viewed as lesser, trivial genres, something for the end of a hard day.
这个新环境应该对文学教学产生什么影响呢？显然它应该会产生一些影响。最糟糕的反应是继续，好像什么都没发生过一样，仿佛书籍是传播语言艺术的独特手段。新技术带来的印刷量增加，对个人的选择性提出了更大的需求。对于当代语言和文学学生来说，最重要的技能之一是知道什么不该读。在手写文化中，只有最有价值的文本才会被复制;在印刷文化中，范围扩大了（因此有了小说，[......还有]歌曲和叮当声，浪漫和肥皂剧。另一个矛盾是，这些较新的、“低级”的体裁往往比文学经典中所谓的“高级”体裁更有趣、更准确地被回忆起来，而这种快乐和知识似乎表明的依恋被毫不犹豫地否定了。初级分支被视为次要的、琐碎的流派，是艰苦一天结束时的东西。

I am not suggesting that there is anything wrong with such double standards. On the contrary, single standards are perhaps both unusual and uninteresting. The conflict which arises when the two value systems are brought into contact is fertile and dynamic. Both Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde as individuals are uninteresting - it is their irreconcilable but simultaneous presence within one body which intrigues. Students and teachers seem to alternate between one world of artistic values and another. Perhaps there is something to be gained from precipitating a clash. One way of doing this is to study works from the canon alongside texts from the technological profusion to which I have referred above.
我并不是说这种双重标准有什么问题。相反，单一标准可能既不寻常又无趣。当两种价值体系接触时，出现的冲突是肥沃的和动态的。Jekyll 博士和 Hyde 先生作为个体都是无趣的——正是他们不可调和但同时存在于一个身体中才引起了人们的好奇。学生和老师似乎在一个具有艺术价值的世界和另一个世界之间交替。也许引发冲突会带来一些好处。一种方法是研究正典中的作品以及我上面提到的技术丰富的文本。

The following are some suggestions for implementing the comparative study of literary and sub-literary or non-literary works. They all exploit a superficial similarity of form or content.
以下是实施文学与亚文学或非文学作品比较研究的一些建议。它们都利用了形式或内容的表面相似性。

Choose an advertisement, a witty piece of graffiti, or a tabloid headline which compresses several meanings into a very few words. Consider it alongside a short poem on the students’ syllabus which also generates more than one meaning. Ask them first to explain how the multiple meanings are achieved in both cases, and then ask why the literary example is generally considered more worthwhile.
选择一个广告、一段诙谐的涂鸦或一个将多种含义压缩成几个词的小报标题。将它与学生教学大纲上的一首短诗放在一起，它也产生了不止一种含义。首先让他们解释在这两种情况下多重含义是如何实现的，然后问为什么文学例子通常被认为更有价值。

One could take, for example, the two-page advertisement for Cinzano (Figure 17.1) which shows a sea urchin on the right-hand page, and a glass of Cinzano on the left-hand page, with the words over the sea urchin:
例如，Cinzano 的两页广告（图 17.1），右侧显示一只海胆，左侧显示一杯 Cinzano，上面写着海胆：