Skip to main content
Log in

The paradox of text in the culture of literacy

  • Published:
Interchange Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper invites a reconsideration of the divide between oral and literate cultural practices in the research on literacy. It begins by challenging the distinction which David Olson has made between text andutterance as one which overstates the separateness of literate and oral practices. To supplement Olson's position, the author describes the continuing importance of oral practices for the promotion of intellectual activities which are centred on texts. He does so, in part, by drawing on the literacy lessons of the Passover Haggadah. The Haggadah proves to be a text which celebrates the intellectual necessity of interruption and the ongoing need for interpretation, two critical practices firmly rooted in an oral regard for the word. This picture of an alternative literacy tradition is put forward as a possibility for a renewed regard for reading and for the text in the classroom.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ben-Asher, N., & Leaf, H. (Eds.). (1957).The junior Jewish encyclopedia. New York: Shengold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, H. (1973).The anxiety of influence: A theory of poetry. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, H. (1975).The kabbalah and criticism. New York: Seabury.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, H. (1979). The breaking of form. In H. Bloom, P. de Man, J. Derrida, G. Hartman, & J. H. Miller (Eds.),Deconstruction and criticism (pp. 1–38). New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boman, T. (1970).Hebrew thought compared with Greek (J. L. Moreau, Trans.). New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bosker, B. (1984).The origins of the Seder: The Passover rite of early rabbinic Judaism. Berkeley: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clanchy, M. T. (1979).From memory to written record: England, 1066–1307. London: Edward Arnold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cole, M., & Scribner, S. (1980).The psychology of literacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derrida, J. (1974).Of grammatology (G. C. Spivak, Trans.). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Derrida, J. (1979). Living on. In H. Bloom, P. de Man, J. Derrida, G. Hartman, & J. H. Miller (Eds.),Deconstruction and criticism (pp. 75–176). New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenstein, E. (1979).The printing press as an agent of change: Communications and cultural transformations in early-modern Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnegan, R. (1973). Literacy versus non-literacy: The great divide. In R. Finnegan & R. Horton (Eds.),Modes of thought. London: Faber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fish, S. (1980). What makes an interpretation acceptable. In S. Fish,Is there a text in this class: The authority of interpretive communities (pp. 338–355). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fredman, R. G. (1981).The Passover service. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, S. M., & Gubar, S. (1979).Madwoman in the attic: The woman writer and the nineteenth century literary imagination. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, P. (1973).The Passover anthology. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goody J., & Watt, I. (1962–63). The consequences of literacy.Comparative Studies in Society and History 5 304–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graff, H. (1979).The literacy myth: Literacy and social structure in the nineteenth century city. New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenfield, P. (1972). Oral and written language: The consequences for cognitive development in Africa, the United States, and England.Language and Speech 15 169–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harste, J., Woodward, V., & Burke, C. (1984).Language stories and literacy lessons. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartman, G. H., & Budick, S. (Eds.). (1986).Midrash and literature. New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Havelock, E. (1976).Origins of western literacy. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Havelock, E. (1982).The literate revolution in Greece and its cultural consequences. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heath, S. B. (1983).Ways with words: Language, life, and work in communities and classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heinemann, J. (1986). The nature of Aggadah. In G. H. Hartmann & S. Budick (Eds.),Midrash and literature (pp. 41–56). New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kermode, F. (1983). Institutional control of interpretation. In F. Kermode,The art of telling: Essays on fiction (pp. 168–184). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kermode, F. (1986). The plain sense of things. In G. H. Hartman and S. Budick (Eds.),Midrash and literature (pp. 179–194). New Haven: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levin, M. (no date).An Israel Haggadah for Passover. New York: Abrams.

  • Locke, J. (1972).An essay concerning human understanding (M. Cranston, Ed.). New York: Collier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luke, C., de Castell, S., & Luke, A. (1983). Beyond criticism: The authority of the school text.Curriculum Inquiry 13 111–127.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montaigne, M. (1909).The essayes of Michael Lord of Montaigne (J. Florio, Ed. & Trans.). London: Oxford University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, D. R. (1977a). From utterance to text: The bias of language in speech and writing.Harvard Educational Review 47 84–109.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, D. R. (1977b). The language of instruction: The literate bias of schooling. In R. C. Anderson, R. J. Spiro, & W. Montague (Eds.),Schooling and the acquisition of knowledge (pp. 65–89). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, D. R. (1980). On the language and authority of textbooks.Journal of Communication 30 186–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, D. R. (1985). Introduction. In D. R. Olson, N. Torrance, & A. Hildyard (Eds.),Literacy, language, and learning: The nature and consequences of reading and writing (pp. 1–15). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ong, W. (1980). Orality and literacy in our time.Journal of Communication 30 197–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ong, W. (1982).Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. London: Methuen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plato. (1952).Plato's Phaedrus (R. Hackforth, Trans.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romaine, S. (1984).The language of children and adolescents: The acquisition of communicative competence. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, H. (1985). The voice of communities and the language of classrooms.Harvard Educational Review 55 448–456.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, L. (1954).Jewish thought as a factor in civilization. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, G. (1985).Writing systems: A linguistic introduction. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scholem, G. (1971). Revelation and tradition as religious categories in Judaism. In G. Scholem (Ed.),The messianic idea in Judaism (pp. 282–303). New York: Schocken.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scribner, S., & Cole, M. (1981).The psychology of literacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schweickart, P. P. (1986). Reading ourselves: Toward a feminist theory of reading. In E. A. Flyn & P. P. Schweickart (Eds.),Gender and reading: Essays on readers, texts, and contexts (pp. 31–62). Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Street, B. (1984).Literacy in theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tannen, D. (1982). The oral/literate continuum in discourse. In D. Tannen (Ed.),Spoken and written discourse (pp. 1–16). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomkins, J. (Ed.). (1980).Reader response criticism: From formalism to post-structuralism. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein, L. (1958).Philosophical investigations (G.E.M. Anscombe, Trans.). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittgenstein, L. (1961).Tractatus logico-philosophicus (D. F. Pears & B. F. McGuinness, Trans.). London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Willinsky, J. The paradox of text in the culture of literacy. Interchange 18, 147–163 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01807067

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01807067

Keywords

Navigation