A cross-cultural analysis of Hemingway’s Cat in the Rain for the Iranian EFL context

Abstract

IntroductionTeachers of English as a foreign language must be aware of the wide array of variables involved in the selection of texts which are to be presented in the classroom. Often this selection process is approached from a linguistic point of view. However, it is vital to consider the text from the perspective of the discourse analyst, especially given the cross-cultural differences seen in the EFL setting, which could easily result in misinterpretation on the part of the reader. It is also of utmost importance for teachers to be aware of the suppressing and/or liberating effects any given text may have on their learners.The present study aims to determine whether Ernest Hemingway's short story Cat in the Rain is suitable for being taught in the Iranian EFL context, as well as detecting the issues and difficulties which may accompany its use. With this purpose in mind, a Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) of the short story was undertaken.Through CDA, we seek to expound on the thematic messages conveyed by the short story. Our study will be aided by occasional references made to other works by Hemingway, and will analyze the rhetorical devices employed by the author both in general and in the short story at hand.Critical Discourse AnalysisLed by Fairclough, Wodak and van Dijk, among others (Wodak & Meyer 2001), the field of CDA attempts to uncover the manipulation and dominance of society by those in power. The relevance of CDA, however, extends to any given means of influence even literary means. According to Fairclough (1995), power is described in terms of asymmetries between participants in discourse events and the capacity to control how texts are produced, distributed and consumed...in particular social contexts (p.1). To him, all features of discourse are potentially ideological, and texture (the form and organization of a text, not just its contents) is an extraordinarily sensitive indicator of sociocultural processes, relations and change (p.4). He discusses the 'orderliness' and 'naturalisation' of state-produced 'autonomous subjects' (although 'state' is used interchangeably with any 'group' or 'culture'), shaped to integrate and be 'competent, non-resistant' participants in society (p.27). Fairclough (1992), in his seminal work Discourse and Social Change, attempts to create a model of textually based discourse analysis, and includes group and personal 'ethos' in the equation. However, criticisms of CDA include its overtly political, potentially contentious nature (Kress 1990); its inclination to be reductionistic and deterministic (Pennycook 1994); and its proponents' tendency to remain uncritical of themselves (Widdowson 1998).The central goal of CDA is to highlight the use of language in the unequal maintenance of power and control over people (Fairclough 1995; Wodak 2001). Therefore, it is primarily an endeavor of social awareness and emancipation through analysis of spoken or written texts, with the aim of uncovering specific ideology, often implicitly portrayed by the author. As such, and despite the various approaches advocated by the forerunners in CDA development (see Meyer, 2001:15-16), CDA assumes the importance of both a historical and contemporary discourse context, and demonstrates its interdisciplinary nature. In addition, CDA includes analysis of interdiscursive and intertextual relationships, distinct from other methods.Attempting to explain how conversations in texts can be critically analyzed, Fairclough (1995) and Kress (1990) point out that one should observe whether communicative interaction is evenly or unevenly distributed. In other words, whether one person dominates the communicative event in any situation/ conversation or there is an active sharing of conversational turn-takings. They suggest that one should examine whether individuals are placed in the subjected position in institutional interaction or are allowed to be active participants in dialogue. …