Affiliation:
1. Yanka Kupala State University of Grodno
Abstract
The article presents an analysis of reading subjects. Reading is defined as complex, non-line poly-subject and inter-subject communication. The author of the text, the reader, and the text are defined as the core subjects of reading. The field of reading realization is defined as the consciousness of the individual as a dialogic education by its nature. The ways of participation of each of the reading subjects in the process of interaction with each other are indicated. The author reveals the active role of the publisher in reading, social and cultural-historical contexts, the history and structure of the text, and the form of its carrier. The special role of the teacher in modern practices of educational reading is noted. The nature of participation in modern Internet reading of hypertext space is considered. Based on the author’s research, the threats and opportunities of reading for the personal transformation of the reader are described. As threats to reading for the reader, we can mention superficial communication and replacing the content of the text with their own ideas and ways of presenting them (reproducing themselves); strong exposure to influence from the text and the author’s position (losing yourself). It is indicated that educational reading is characterized by a strong dependence of the reader on the attitudes and interpretations of the teacher (loss of self). The integrative characteristic of the reader as a subject of reading-communication is determined by his reading strategy, which reflects the General level of reader culture. The developing mechanism of the personality in reading is the recognition and acceptance of “the other as different from the reader”, sensitivity to cultural and personal differences. The prospects for studying reading in the field of experimental research of reading mechanisms and the development of psychological and educational programs for the formation of reading competencies are outlined.
Publisher
Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv
Reference38 articles.
1. Auerbach, B. (2006). Publish and perish: La definition legitime des sciences sociales au prisme du debat sur la crise de l’edition SHS. Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales, 164, 75–92.
2. Horowitz, I. L. (1993). The Decomposition of Sociology. New York : Oxford University Press.
3. Hyland, K. (2007). Disciplinary discourses: Social Interactions in Academic Writing. Ann Arbor, MI, Michigan : University of Michigan Press.
4. Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5. Scholes, R. E. (1985). Textual power. London : Yale University Press. Stern, W. (1906). Person und Sache. (Bd. 1.). Leipzig : J.A. Barth.