Volume 6, Issue 3 (Autumn 2023)
Iranian Journal of Educational Sociology 2023, 6(3): 131-139 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Khoshniyat A S, Amerian M. (2023). A Comparative Study of Intersemiotic Complementarity of Visual and Verbal Modes in Three English School Textbooks from Iran and Malaysia. Iranian Journal of Educational Sociology. 6(3), 131-139. doi:10.61186/ijes.6.3.131
URL: http://iase-idje.ir/article-1-1381-en.html
URL: http://iase-idje.ir/article-1-1381-en.html
1- PhD student, Department of English Language and Literature, Arak University, Arak, Iran.
2- Associate Professor, Department of English Language and Literature, Arak University, Arak, Iran (Corresponding Author).
2- Associate Professor, Department of English Language and Literature, Arak University, Arak, Iran (Corresponding Author).
Abstract: (431 Views)
Purpose: The integration of visual and verbal modes in educational materials, particularly in school textbooks, plays a chief role in enhancing the learning experience. Thus, the present study aimed to analyze the intersemiotic complementarity of verbal and visual modes in three English school textbooks from two countries with different policies toward English education at public schools, Iran and Malaysia.
Methodology: Employing a qualitative descriptive approach, this study analyzes the intersemiotic complementarity within English school textbooks used in the first grade of high school in Iran and Malaysia, focusing on three selected textbooks: Prospect 1 (Iran), Form 1 (Malaysia), and Pulse 2 (Malaysia). The analysis was guided by Royce's (1998) framework for intersemiotic complementarity, with a particular emphasis on the ideational metafunction. This involved examining the coherence between visual representations (images) and textual content (dialogues) to assess how these elements complement each other in conveying educational content and facilitating learning.
Findings: The analysis revealed a marked disparity in the integration of visual and verbal modes between the textbooks from the two countries. Iranian textbooks, specifically Prospect 1, demonstrated a significant disconnect between images and text, often leading to confusion and potentially hindering students' learning. In contrast, the Malaysian textbooks (Form 1 and Pulse 2) exhibited a high level of intersemiotic complementarity, with images effectively supporting and enhancing the textual content, thereby facilitating a more cohesive and comprehensible learning experience for students.
Conclusion: The study demonstrates the importance of cohesive integration of visual and verbal elements in textbooks to support effective learning, highlighting the need for strategic multimodal design in educational materials. By ensuring a cohesive integration of visual and verbal elements, textbooks can become more effective tools in enhancing comprehension and improving learning outcomes. This research contributes to the growing discourse on multimodal education, suggesting pathways for future investigations into the optimization of textbook design for enhanced educational impact.
Methodology: Employing a qualitative descriptive approach, this study analyzes the intersemiotic complementarity within English school textbooks used in the first grade of high school in Iran and Malaysia, focusing on three selected textbooks: Prospect 1 (Iran), Form 1 (Malaysia), and Pulse 2 (Malaysia). The analysis was guided by Royce's (1998) framework for intersemiotic complementarity, with a particular emphasis on the ideational metafunction. This involved examining the coherence between visual representations (images) and textual content (dialogues) to assess how these elements complement each other in conveying educational content and facilitating learning.
Findings: The analysis revealed a marked disparity in the integration of visual and verbal modes between the textbooks from the two countries. Iranian textbooks, specifically Prospect 1, demonstrated a significant disconnect between images and text, often leading to confusion and potentially hindering students' learning. In contrast, the Malaysian textbooks (Form 1 and Pulse 2) exhibited a high level of intersemiotic complementarity, with images effectively supporting and enhancing the textual content, thereby facilitating a more cohesive and comprehensible learning experience for students.
Conclusion: The study demonstrates the importance of cohesive integration of visual and verbal elements in textbooks to support effective learning, highlighting the need for strategic multimodal design in educational materials. By ensuring a cohesive integration of visual and verbal elements, textbooks can become more effective tools in enhancing comprehension and improving learning outcomes. This research contributes to the growing discourse on multimodal education, suggesting pathways for future investigations into the optimization of textbook design for enhanced educational impact.
Keywords: Intersemiotic Complementarity, Textbook Analysis, Prospect 1, Form 1, Pulse 2, Multimodality
References
1. Aijmer, K. and Altenberg, B. (2004). Advances in corpus linguistics.. [DOI:10.1163/9789004333710]
2. Amilia, F., Werdiningsih, I., & Aditiawan, R. (2022). The development of lemma and meaning in the language variety used by adolescents on social media. Bahastra, 42(1), 26-33. [DOI:10.26555/bs.v42i1.33]
3. Bartlett, T. and Bowcher, W. (2021). Context in systemic functional linguistics. Functions of Language, 28(3), 243-259. [DOI:10.1075/fol.20017.bar]
4. Cahyani, F., Rukmini, D., & Fitriati, S. (2021). The role of representational meaning of images in supporting ideational meaning in english in mind: students’ book. English Education Journal, 11(1), 74-104. [DOI:10.15294/eej.v11i1.43115]
5. Chen, S. and Zhong, Z. (2022). Perceiving the poetic world: a corpus-assisted transitivity analysis of poetry comics. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. [DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1061169] [PMID] []
6. Cloonan, A., Paatsch, L., & Hutchison, K. (2019). Renewing literature circles: pedagogies for curated multimodal responses. The Reading Teacher, 73(5), 647-656. [DOI:10.1002/trtr.1875]
7. Cmeciu, C. (2022). Representing agency and action in the #storiesfromvaccination governmental campaign in romania. a multimodal approach. Punctum International Journal of Semiotics, 08(02), 61-81. [DOI:10.18680/hss.2022.0016]
8. Cunningham, K. Modes of feedback in esl writing: implications of shifting from text to screencast.. [DOI:10.31274/etd-180810-5966]
9. Dalamu, T. (2018). Evaluating 'registerial' norms in advertising texts: a systemic perspective. The Buckingham Journal of Language and Linguistics, 11, 64-95. [DOI:10.5750/bjll.v11i0.1612]
10. Damayanti, I. and Febrianti, Y. (2020). Multimodal literacy: unfolding reading path in children's picture book and its potential for efl classrooms. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 9(3), 616-627. [DOI:10.17509/ijal.v9i3.23212]
11. Effendi, J., Tjandra, A., Sakti, S., & Nakamura, S. (2020). Augmenting images for asr and tts through single-loop and dual-loop multimodal chain framework..
https://doi.org/10.21437/Interspeech.2020-2001 [DOI:10.21437/interspeech.2020-2001]
12. El-Nashar, M. (2023). An intersemiotic analysis of the arabic dubbed version of disney's frozen let it go. International Journal of Arabic-English Studies, 23(1), 77-104. [DOI:10.33806/ijaes2000.23.1.5]
13. Gu, Y., Chen, S., & Marsic, I. (2018). Deep mul timodal learning for emotion recognition in spoken language..
https://doi.org/10.1109/ICASSP.2018.8462440 [DOI:10.1109/icassp.2018.8462440] [PMID] []
14. Haider, S. (2022). A corpus-based analysis of coherent writing skills of pakistani english language learners. Pakistan Languages and Humanities Review, 6(II).
https://doi.org/10.47205/plhr.2022(6-II)76 [DOI:10.47205/plhr.2022(6-ii)76]
15. Hapsari, A. (2016). The role of explicit pragmatic instruction to improve second language learners' ideational metafunction of the target language. Journal of English and Education, 7(2), 36-41. [DOI:10.20885/jee.vol7.iss2.art4]
16. Haris, N., Febrianti, Y., & Yannuar, N. (2023). Exploring augmentation of meaning through intersemiotic complementarity in children comic book series. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12(3), 752-764. [DOI:10.17509/ijal.v12i3.39951]
17. Harvey, A. (2022). Relational clauses in english technical discourse. Pragmatics Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (Ipra), 379-400. [DOI:10.1075/prag.11.4.02har]
18. Holšánová, J. (2020). Uncovering scientific and multimodal literacy through audio description. Journal of Visual Literacy, 39(3-4), 132-148.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1051144X.2020.1826219 [DOI:10.1080/1051144x.2020.1826219]
19. Hsieh, C., Hsieh, C., & Cheng, P. (2022). Mr. right: multimodal retrieval on representation of image with text.. [DOI:10.48550/arxiv.2209.13764]
20. Im, J., Kim, M., Cho, H., & Chung, S. (2021). Self-supervised multimodal opinion summarization.. [DOI:10.18653/v1/2021.acl-long.33]
21. Istighfaroh, A., Yannuar, N., Febrianti, Y., r, N., & Basthomi, Y. (2022). Little dim sum warriors: translanguaging of chinese and english in educational comic books for bilingual children. 3l the Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 28(3), 35-51.
https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2022-2803-03 [DOI:10.17576/3l-2022-2803-03]
22. Jabour, R. and Faisal, W. (2022). An investigation of the integration of inter-semiotic complementarity in iraqi efl textbook. Register Journal, 15(2), 245-263. [DOI:10.18326/rgt.v15i2.245-263]
23. Jerome, C. and Ting, S. (2021). What's in a message: a systemic functional analysis of cancer prevention messages. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 32(1), 57-75. [DOI:10.1111/ijal.12380]
24. Khusna, W. and Hardjatno, N. (2022). The ideational meaning of covid-19 health promotion posters: multimodal discourse. Diksi, 30(1), 57-65. [DOI:10.21831/diksi.v30i1.47248]
25. Koutsikou, M., Christidou, V., Papadopoulou, M., & Bonoti, F. (2021). Interpersonal meaning: verbal text-image relations in multimodal science texts for young children. Education Sciences, 11(5), 245. [DOI:10.3390/educsci11050245]
26. Leijon, M. (2016). Space as designs for and in learning: investigating the interplay between space, interaction and learning sequences in higher education. Visual Communication, 15(1), 93-124. [DOI:10.1177/1470357215608553]
27. Lim, F. (2019). Investigating intersemiosis: a systemic functional multimodal discourse analysis of the relationship between language and gesture in classroom discourse. Visual Communication, 20(1), 34-58. [DOI:10.1177/1470357218820695]
28. Ling, Z. and Fu, Q. (2019). Interpretation of the multimodal cultural pattern of urban tourism images of shaanxi.. [DOI:10.2991/ichssd-19.2019.20]
29. Liu, X. (2017). Multimodal exemplification:the expansion of meaning in electronic dictionaries. Lexikos, 27(1). [DOI:10.5788/27-1-1404]
30. Lopez-Ozieblo, R. (2021). Learning from a corpus of students' academic writing. Revista Signos, 54(106), 645-667.
https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-09342021000200645 [DOI:10.4067/s0718-09342021000200645]
31. Mahasneh, A. and Abdelal, R. (2022). Resemiotization of illustrations in children's picture books between english and arabic. Sage Open, 12(2), 215824402210933. [DOI:10.1177/21582440221093364]
32. Maier, C. (2009). Visual evaluation in film trailers. Visual Communication, 8(2), 159-180. [DOI:10.1177/1470357209102112]
33. Maier, C. (2017). Multimodal communication óf specialized knowledge across hypertext innovation and generic tradition. Hermes - Journal of Language and Communication in Business, (41), 59-80. [DOI:10.7146/hjlcb.v21i41.96814]
34. Memon, S. (2021). A multimodal analysis of selected placards from the 'aurat march' 2018 of pakistan. Review of Applied Management and Social Sciences, 4(2), 467-478. [DOI:10.47067/ramss.v4i2.147]
35. Nurfaizah, N. (2022). Multimodal discourse analysis of visual protest on climate change. English Journal of Indragiri, 6(2), 246-266. [DOI:10.32520/eji.v6i2.1984]
36. Pazaer, N. and Assaiqeli, A. (2023). Pre-service teachers' views on using english comics to improve pupils' english language skills. Studies in English Language and Education, 10(1), 197-215. [DOI:10.24815/siele.v10i1.21836]
37. Pederson, R. and Myers, J. (2021). Critical literacy and semiotic juxtaposition: the possibilities of multimodal pedagogy in korea. Stem Journal, 22(2), 73-92. [DOI:10.16875/stem.2021.22.2.73]
38. Pineh, A. (2016). A critical review of consciousness-raising approaches: applied linguistics vs. systemic functional linguistics. International Journal of Linguistics, 8(2), 12. [DOI:10.5296/ijl.v8i2.9273]
39. Plass, J., Chun, D., Mayer, R., & Leutner, D. (1998). Supporting visual and verbal learning preferences in a second-language multimedia learning environment.. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(1), 25-36. [DOI:10.1037/0022-0663.90.1.25]
40. Smith, B. (2018). Composing for affect, audience, and identity: toward a multidimensional understanding of adolescents' multimodal composing goals and designs. Written Communication, 35(2), 182-214. [DOI:10.1177/0741088317752335]
41. Sugianto, A. (2021). 'can we see it?': contextualizing 'deforestation' from an english-medium science textbook for a primary school level. J-Lalite Journal of English Studies, 2(2), 86. [DOI:10.20884/1.jes.2021.2.2.5072]
42. Sugianto, A., Andriyani, D., & Prasetyo, I. (2021). The visual-verbal text interrelation: lessons from the ideational meanings of a phonics material in a primary level efl textbook. Enjourme (English Journal of Merdeka), 6(1), 1-10. [DOI:10.26905/enjourme.v6i1.5865]
43. Sukma, M., Harti, L., & Ariyanti, L. (2022). Revealing equiterra campaign by united nations women: multimodal perspective. Prosodi, 16(2), 136-152. [DOI:10.21107/prosodi.v16i2.14201]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
.jpg)
