International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature ISSN 2200-3592 (Print), ISSN 2200-3452 (Online) Vol. 2 No. 5; September 2013 Copyright © Australian International Academic Centre, Australia EFL Learners’ Perceptions of a Method Allowing Subjective Interpretation of Literary Texts: A Data-Driven Approach Seyyed Ali Ostovar-Namaghi (Corresponding author) Shahrood University of Technology, Iran E-mail: saostovarnamaghi@yahoo.com Samina Alam Pune University, India Received: 10-09-2012 Accepted: 26-05-2013 Published: 01-09-2013 doi:10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.2n.5p.1 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.2n.5p.1 Abstract This study aims at conceptualizing students’ views concerning a method that allows subjective interpretation of literary texts. To this end, twelve EFL learners’ views were theoretically sampled and analyzed iteratively through the rigorous schemes of grounded theory. The results yielded a set of propositions all illustrating the potential of subjective interpretation of literary texts for creating a lively atmosphere for negotiation and redefining language learning and teaching tasks. The implications of the study for syllabus designers, test developers, teachers and learners are profound. However, further studies need to be undertaken in other similar contexts before the field could systematically allow the introduction of literary texts for learners’ subjective interpretation. Keywords: subjective interpretation; literary texts; learners’ perceptions; grounded theory 1. Introduction In a wide-ranging survey of trends over the past century of literature in foreign language education, Kramsch (2000) underline how in the early part of the twentieth century, learning a foreign language meant a close study of the canonical literature in that language. In the period from the 1940s to the 1960s, literature disappeared from the language curriculum entirely as more functional models of learning, with the transactional requirements of communication to the fore, displaced it. Literature was seen as extraneous to everyday communicative needs and as something of an elitist pursuit. However, in the 1970s and 1980s the growth of communicative language teaching methods led to a reconsideration of the place of literature in the language classroom, with recognition of the primary authenticity of literary texts and of the fact that more imaginative and representational uses of language could be embedded alongside more referentially utilitarian output. Just as Kramsch (2000) illustrate the movement from literature as part of an elitist study of foreign languages at the beginning of the 20th century to a view of literature as an authentic source of language at the end of the century. Hall (2005) discerns a move from a suspicious attitude towards literature in the middle of the 20th century, through attempts to incorporate it in communicative language teaching through humanistic techniques, reader response, and stylistics. This welcome resurgence of literature can be due to the following merits: • Literature provides opportunities for extended output, and led to a great deal of interaction, characterizes by responsiveness, emotional engagement and authenticity (Kim, 2004) • Literature improves the amount and quality of student discourse (Meskill & Ranglova, 2000). • Literary discussions are ‘more “substantial” than simply answering grammar questions (Yang, 2001). • Literature enhances involvement and enthusiasm (Kim, 2004). • Literature is enjoyable, that is deals with substantial and non-trivial topics, etc.( Hirvela, 2005; Yang, 2002). • Literature introduces and encourages critical thinking (Diaz-Santos, 2000). • Literature encourages critical literacy (Thompson, 2000; Zubair, 2003). It should be noted, however, that these potential merits are contingent upon teachers’ approach to presenting literature. Donato and Brooks (2004) demonstrate how the pedagogical stance of the teacher led to an inhibition of discussion in the classroom, resulted in word or phrase length utterances, and prevented the learners from developing topics. Investigating an intermediate level Spanish course which focused on reading comprehension and incorporated literary texts for this purpose, Weist (2004) found that ‘the course seemed to follow the traditional view of the instructor as the dispenser of knowledge… the instructor was viewed as the one who knew what was important about the texts, and the students often expressed a feeling of tremendous responsibility to develop the ability to interpret the texts like the instructor.’ (Weist 2004, p. 214). One important point here is that EFL teachers normally receive no training in using literary texts in the classroom (Hirvela 1989; Belcher & Hirvela 2000). Methodology handbooks often have no mention of literature (e.g. Hedge 2000; Richards & Renandya 2002), though Ur (1996), Celce-Murcia (2001) and Carter and Nunan (2000) are exceptions, and