 |
[email protected] |
 |
3275638434 |
 |
 |
| Paper Publishing WeChat |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License
Sergio González Núñez
Full-Text PDF
XML 90 Views
DOI:10.17265/2161-623X/2024.03.004
Rosario Castellanos University, CDMX, Mexico
Educational innovation consists of the implementation of teaching strategies with the interaction of technology applied to teaching, in addition to constant training of teachers, which are fundamental axes to achieve this, of course the main axis in this process is the students, and with this in mind, the Rosario Castellanos University updates its teaching methods in hybridity, with multimodal semiotics in the degree in Communication Sciences, and little by little obtains notable results such as reflexivity, critical thinking, and discourse analysis in the media, in their students.
educational innovation, hybriduality, multimodal semiotics, analysis of written discourse
Sergio González Núñez. (2024). Innovation in the Generic Competence of Reflective and Critical Communication, Derived From the Implementation of Multimodal Semiotics as a Didactic, in Communication Sciences Degree. US-China Education Review A, March 2024, Vol. 14, No. 3, 191-199.
Barthes, R. (1977). The rhetoric of the image. In S. Heath (ed.), Image-music-text (pp. 32-51). London: Fontana.
Bateman, J. (2014). Multimodal coherence research and its applications. In H. Gruber, & G. Redeker (eds.), The pragmatics of discourse coherence (pp. 145 -177). Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Bezemer, J., & Kress, G. (2010). Changing text: A social semiotic analysis of textbooks. Designs for Learning, 3(1-2), 10-29.
Bezemer, J., & Kress, G. (2014). Touch: A resource for making meaning. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 37(2), 77-85.
Bezemer, J., Diamantopolou, S., Jewitt, C., Kress, G., & Mavers, D. (2012). Using a social semiotic approach to multimodality: Researching learning in schools, museums and hospitals. Work document. Retrieved from http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/2258/4/NCRM_working_paper_0112.pdf
Boudon, E., & Parodi, G. (2014). Multisemiotic artifacts and academic discourse of economics: Construction of knowledge in the Manual genre. Signs, 47(85), 164-195.
Forceville, C. (2008). Metaphors in pictures and multimodal representations. In R. Gibbs (ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 462-482). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Forceville, C. (2009). Non-verbal and multimodal metaphor in a cognitive framework. In C. Forceville, & E. Urios-Aparisi (eds.), Multimodal metaphor (pp. 19-44). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Forceville, C. (2017). Visual and multimodal metaphor in advertising: Cultural perspectives. Styles of Communication, 9(2), 26-41.
Forceville, C., & Urios-Aparisi, E. (2009). Introduction. In C. Forceville, & E. Urios-Aparisi (eds.), Multimodal metaphor (pp. 3-16). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Gibbs, R., & Colston, H. (1995). The cognitive psychological reality of image schemas and their transformation. Cognitive Linguistics, 6, 347-378.
González, J. (2013). Multimodal literacy: Uses and possibilities. Open Field, 32(1), 91-113.
Halliday, M. A. K. (1978). Language as a social semiotic. The social interpretation of language and meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Hasan, R. (1989). Language, context and text: Aspects of language in a social-semiotic perspective (2nd ed.). Oxford: Oxford University.
Halliday, M. A. K., & Matthiessen, C. (2013). Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar (4th ed.). London: Routledge.
Jewitt, C., Bezemer, J., & O’Halloran, K. (2016). Introducing multimodality. New York: Routledge.
Kaltenbacher, M. (2007). Perspectives in the analysis of multimodality: From the beginnings to the state of the art. Latin American Journal of Discourse Studies, 7(1), 31-57.
Koller, V. (2009). Brand images: Multimodal metaphor in corporate branding. In C. Forceville, & E. Urios-Aparisi (eds.), Multimodal metaphor (pp. 45-72). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London: Routledge.
Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. London: Arnold.
Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design (2nd ed.). London /New York: Routledge.
Lakoff, G, & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Machin, D. (2016). Introduction to multimodal analysis. London: Bloomsbury.
Machin, D., & Mayr, A. (2012). How to do critical discourse analysis: A multimodal introduction. London: SAGE Publications.
Martinec, R., & Salway, A. (2005). A system for image-text relations in new (and old) media. Visual communication, 4(3), 337-371.
Martínez-Lirola, M. (2016). Multimodal representation of Sub-Saharan immigrants as illegal: Deconstructing their portrayal as victims, heroes and threats in a sample from the Spanish press. Bulletin of Hispanic Studies, 93(4), 343-360.
Martínez-Lirola, M. (2017). Linguistic and visual strategies for portraying immigrants as people deprived of human rights. Social Semiotics, 27(1), 21-38.
Moya- Guijarro, J. (2013). Visual metonymy in children’s picture books. Review of Cognitive Linguistics, 11(2), 336-362.
O’Halloran, K. (2012). Multimodal discourse analysis. Latin American Journal of Discourse Studies, 12(1), 75-97.
O’Halloran, K., & Lim, F. (2014). Systemic functional multimodal discourse analysis. In S. Norris, & C. Maier (eds.), Interactions, images and texts: A reader in multimodality (pp. 137-153). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Parodi, G. (2010). Multisemiosis and corpus linguistics: (Multi) semiotic artifacts in the texts of six disciplines in the corpus pucv-2010. RLA, 48(2), 33-70.
Parodi, G., & Julio, C. (2015). More than words: Contending semiotic systems and the role of disciplinary knowledge in specialized text comprehension. Ibérica, 33, 11-35.
Parodi, G., & Julio, C. (2016). Where do your eyes land when reading disciplinary multi-semiotic texts? Word and graph processing in an experimental study with eye tracker. Signs, 4P(S1), 149-183.
Parodi, G., & Julio, C. (2017). There are not only words in written texts: some theories and models of multimodal or multisemiotic text comprehension. Reading Research, 8, 27-48.
Roderick, I. (2016). Critical discourse studies and technology: A multimodal approach to analyzing technoculture. London: Bloomsbury.
Rodríguez, D., & Velázquez, A. (2011). Critical analysis of multimodal discourse in the international cartoon of The Washington Post newspaper. Cuadernos de Lingüística Hispánica, 17, 39-52.
Royce, T. (2007). Intersemiotic complementarity: A framework for multimodal discourse analysis. In T. Royce, & W. Bowcher (eds.), New directions in the analysis of multimodal discourse (pp. 63-110). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Serafini, F. (2012). Expanding the four resources model: Reading visual and multi modal texts. Pedagogies: An International Journal, 7(2), 150-164.
Urios-Aparisi, E. (2009). Interactions of multimodal metaphor and metonymy in TV commercials: Four case studies. In C. Forceville & E. Urios-Aparisi (eds.), Multimodal metaphor (pp. 95-118). Berlin /New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Walsh, M. (2010). Multimodal literacy: What does it mean for classroom practice? Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 33(3), 211-239.
Wodak, R. (2011). Critical linguistics and critical discourse analysis. In J. Zienkowski, J.-O. Ostman, & J. Verschueren (eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 50-70). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Yu, N. (2009). Nonverbal and multimodal manifestations of metaphors and metonymies: A case study. In C. Forceville & E. Urios-Aparisi (Eds.), Multimodal metaphor (pp. 119-143). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.
Zhao, S., Djonov, E., Bjorkvall, A., & Boeriis, M. (eds.) (2018). Advancing multimodal and critical discourse studies: Interdisciplinary research inspired by Theo van Leeuwen’s social semiotics. London: Routledge.