1

Mythic Language and Identity in Narrative ELT Materials Development:

Research Proposal

Richard J. Stockton

richardstockton155@hotmail.com

2019
 2

Table of Contents

Impetus ........................................................................................................................... 3
Problem and aims .......................................................................................................... 3
Research question .......................................................................................................... 3
General discussion and syllabus ..................................................................................... 4
Understanding narrative ....................................................................................... 4
Identity and L2 identity .......................................................................................... 4
Mythic language ................................................................................................... 5
Storytelling and narrative inquiry ELT ................................................................... 5
ELT practice ......................................................................................................... 6
Neurology and speech language pathology ......................................................... 6
Materials design ................................................................................................... 7
Action research ............................................................................................................... 8
Methodology and identity in the teacher/developer—materials—learner chain-
link ........................................................................................................................ 8
Bridging a gap ............................................................................................ 9
Materials for teaching narrative .......................................................................... 10
Mythic language in materials development ......................................................... 12
The RID ................................................................................................... 12
The ASI .................................................................................................... 15
Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 16
Biodata .......................................................................................................................... 17
Optional additional synergistic materials test ................................................................ 17
References .................................................................................................................... 18
 3

Mythic Language and Identity in Narrative ELT Materials Development

Impetus

As an English language teacher, I became familiar with a large number of storytelling

games. But many produced just random sequences without any meaning, nor did they
support lesson aims. I set out to understand what makes a good or a bad narrative
game, and to make a better game. I discovered that what is needed is presence and
scaffolding of elements of fiction and plot, which could also be called archetypes and
journey. Eventually I felt that I had succeeded (Stockton, forthcoming). This project led
to much deeper and larger questions about the nature of narrative, language, and
identity, and their relation to materials development for TESOL.

Problem and aims

Narrative is ubiquitous in ELT. But narrative has resisted complete understanding

(Price, 1973, p.11-16). For ELT, narrative is intertwined with teacher and learner
identity (Barkhuizen, 2014, p.450 or Wajnryb, 2003, p.156), but research, especially
empirical, has been challenging to design (Nunan & Choi, 2010, p.1), and in some
areas, as yet limited (Lucarevschi, 2016, p.38-40). The following research proposal
outlines a course of study, and action research plan, aiming to shed some light on a
specific slice of ELT, which has not been extensively investigated, and by methods that
can be verified, and evaluated: mythic language and how it might be used to benefit
ELT materials development for narrative teaching, and developing L2 identity. This
study will provide a benefit by filling gaps in our knowledge of the topics of mythic
language and identity, and practically, it contributes to advancing the field in the applied
real-world setting of materials development for teaching narrative in ELT. Narrative
runs through almost every ELT textbook, but is not generally treated as a skill in its own
right, leading potentially to piecemeal teaching and learning, despite narrative ability’s
importance across language use, and also figuring in major international examinations.

Research question

What is the role, and what might be the benefits of controlled application of mythic
language in ELT materials development for teaching narrative, and developing L2
identity?

Sub-questions:

 What is the relationship between L2 identity formation and narrative in language

learning? How could this inform materials design?
 Is L2 identity, maybe in its early stages of development, a rupture of, dissolution,
or breaking down of ego state?
 Are some narratives, perhaps archaic or journey-based, better for teaching some
English skills and functions, discourse or cultural competence? Are modern and
rearranged narratives, which Peterson (2017a, 2017b) or Booker (2004, p.347-
 4

517) criticize, somehow less effective than archaic ones? Does it make any
difference what the learners’ L1 (or C1) is?

General discussion and syllabus

Understanding narrative

This research proposal has the first of Bruner’s (2002) two motives for studying
narrative, “control it…and its effect” (p.11). Approaches to understanding narrative
reach back into ancient times (Aristotle, 1984 & 2000). In earlier centuries Gozzi and
Polti (1924) made attempts, or more recently Auden (1968) and Booker (2004), to find
narrative structure in literature and the arts.

A quite different approach was taken by persons like Frazer (1922); or Aarne,
Thompson and Uther (2016) who imagined an encyclopedic catalogue (the ATU)
organized by motif might lead to a narrative science (Uther, 2009, p.19).

Propp (1968) completely revolutionized study of narrative with his discovery of

syntagmatic functions. Propp had two antithetical groups of successors: firstly, those
who took a mythic approach and also saw narrative as underlyingly spiritual (Propp,
2000), such as Campbell (2004) or Eliade (1963); and secondly, structuralists like Lévi-
Strauss, who Propp saw as perverting his work (Lévi-Strauss, 1984, p.189), and
paradigmatic post-structuralist like Barthes (1975), and the school of narratology
founded by Todorov (1971); interest in AI narrative intelligence in computing descends
significantly from narratology (Schank, 1985).

Identity and L2 identity

It is widely believed that narrative informs our identity, playing “the role of giving
organization, meaning, and structure to a life” (Flanagan, 1992, p.189). However,
agreement on just what identity is has been more “inconclusive” (Norton, 1997, p.409).
In a very ancient view of identity, there is a distinction between a unitary and peaceful
silent Self (Ramana Maharshi, 2002) contrasted with a materially dependent and
conflictual, relational identity (Norton, 2000, p.8-14); pluralistic post-structuralist theories
of language as situated are important to this latter view of identity (Bakhtin, 1981).

Drawing on the ideas of Plato, Kant (1998), and the Romantic movement, Jung (1947)
sought to reconcile subjectivity and objectivity. For analytic psychology, identity
formation is a collaboration, coming out of “mythic awareness” (Jung, 1933), between
the innate self and the material world (Jung, 1917).

From the time of the “social turn” in SLA research (Block, 2003), L2 identity became a
significant consideration for ELT. Learning an additional language means developing
another identity (Norton, 2013). A well-known model of identity in TESOL has been
Kachru’s (1985) with its “inner circle”, “outer circle”, and “expanding circle” in which “the
entire process is driven by identity reconstructions by the parties involved” (Schneider,
 5

2003, p.234). Kachru’s conception of World Englishes is not Whorfian, for him, “cultural
specificity” and language are separable (1990, p.218-219), hence for Kachru there is
Singaporean English, Indian English and so on, and indeed, ELT can be separated from
Western culture (Stockton, 2018), as some say it should be (Adaskou, Britten & Fahsi,
1990). The relationship between language and culture remains charged and
unresolved.

Mythic language

Mythic language can fairly uncontroversially be said to operate in places like dreams,
children’s imagination, story, self-identity, art, world-view, and values. Myths underlie
“the way we unconsciously perceive the world: to the inner patterns of our psychic
development as individuals” (Booker, 2004, p.11). Jung hypothesized that language is
underlaid by universal trans-cultural archetypes of the unconscious, “like the instincts,
the collective thought patterns of the human mind are innate and inherited” (Jung, 1964,
p.75). Archetypes are not standalone, but parts of the story of a journey, to resolve
conflict and discover identity. There are a number of closely related concepts, with
nuanced differences, to archetypes: mythopoeic (Frankfort et al., 1946), mythical
(Creuzer, 1837), mythic (Silvonen, 2018), mythos (Shelburne, 1988), magical (Frazer,
1922), associative (Taylor, 1920), collective representations (Lévy-Bruhl, 1985),
primary, primordial or regressive (Martindale, 1975a, b).

Whether and to what degree archetypes are universal across cultures (or World
Englishes) is unresolved; Segal (2014) believes that a “peek” through the ATU shows
obviously they are not (p.224). Every culture has its central organizing myths according
to Spengler (1937), organization (Kaplan, 1966), and story structures says Bell (2002),
so the archetypes Jungians identify might really only be the West’s. For ELT this leaves
an uncertainty whether it could be because of the “fact that cultures the world over are
heavily influence by the Hollywood model which draws from archetypal material (Hero
myths, etc.), …that even foreign-language (non-English) speakers are already familiar
with many narratives from prior learning” (Lance Storm, personal communication, 2018),

While Jungian conceptions have been brought into the field of education (Mayes, 2005),
they have appeared less in TESOL; in ELT generally via learning styles research
connected to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) which is derived from analytic
psychology (Oxford, 1990, 2003). An example of applications with Jungian archetypes
is Broome (2003). Going into the future, Semetsky and Delpech‐Ramey (2012) desire
educators further “explore the role of the unconscious in learning” (p.69).

Storytelling and narrative inquiry in ELT

The study of narrative in TESOL has taken two very different courses. The one is use
and research into story and storytelling, the other is narrative inquiry of teacher, and
also learner, identity. While both are concerned with narrative, storytelling research “is
looking at narrative from a very different perspective” than narrative inquiry (Gary
Barkhuizen, personal communication, 2018). As well as differences of purpose and
 6

method, there are also ideological differences, the storytelling approach is more
“retroactive” (Hyvärinen, 2008, p.450), and narrative inquiry post-structuralist
(Etherington, 2013).

Language and story are interwoven, hence story is very ideally suited to language
teaching. Story has been employed for teaching many skills in ELT: speaking (Hsu,
2010 or Atta-Alla, 2012), pronunciation (Lucarevschi, 2018), vocabulary (Huang, 2006,
Maldarez, 2010 or Abrashid, 2012), and grammar (Bardovi-Harlig, 1995), and using
story is memorable and meaningful (Elkkiliç and Akça, 2008).

While there is disagreement about exactly what defines narrative inquiry, it might be
called an “iterative” form of qualitative research (Dörnyei, 2007), drawing on
ethnographic and sociolinguistics methodology, that aids reflective teaching practice for
change (Johnson & Golombek, 2002, p.1-14). The observer paradox figures
significantly in the meaning making or “narrative knowledging” (Barkhuizen, 2011).
Content, structure, type (Ochs & Capps, 2009), deictics (Hamburger, 1993), and layers
of context (Barkhuizen, 2016) of narratives may all be subject to analysis.

ELT practice

Learners often find narrative tasks more difficult than working with other text-types
(Quellmalz, Capell & Chou, 1982), so its teaching is important given how widely
narrative appears in language use. A large body of tried and tested practices and
materials exist for the teaching and assessing of narrative. For instance, Cambridge
International AS and A Level English Language (Gould & Rankin, 2014) has a complete
section on story, and from this year Cambridge is publishing Narrative (Giovanelli,
2018). The organization has also developed a suite of assessments together with
scoring criteria and rubrics for narrative production and comprehension like the Starters
through Flyers YL speaking exams, IGCSE, and O though A level writing tasks and
reading passages. These assessments have been fairly extensively researched and
published on, for example the YL storytelling tasks in Research Notes Issues 7 and 10
(2002).

Meanwhile, outside academia, binders of printouts in teachers’ rooms, word of mouth

trade knowledge, and a myriad of ESL sites on “the Internet” have “greatly contributed
to the circulation of ideas” (Wajnryb, 2003, p.vii).

Neurology and speech language pathology

Brain science can contribute significantly to applications of ELT for narrative teaching;
for example, simply giving a title to a story passage results in greater activation across
multiple regions of the brain while reading (St. George, Kutas, Martinez & Sereno,
1999). Theories of narrative must ultimately be in sync with brain research (Mar, 2004,
p.1423); neurology both bounds and suggests what approaches could be valid for
language teaching.
 7

Older brain research was able to show the dimensions of narrative faculty through
studying brain injury and its clinical manifestations: “arrested narration”, “unbounded
narration”, “undernarration” and “denarration” (Young & Saver, 2001, p.76). Tests of
narrative ability like the ENNI (Schneider, Dubé, & Hayward, 2005) and TNL-2 (Gillam &
Pearson, 2017) for speech language pathology (SLP) have accomplished something
similar. The development of PET and MRI made it possible to image parts of the brain
involved in narration in real-time as storytelling or reading was underway. Recently, it
has become appreciated that diverse areas of the brain involved in narrative are
interconnected: the term default mode network (DMN) was coined in 2001 (Raichle et
al., 2001).

The DMN is involved in daydreaming (Buckner, Andrews-Hanna & Schacter, 2008),

nighttime dreaming (Domhoff & Fox, 2015), creativity (Kühn et al., 2014),
“autobiographical thinking” (Barron & Yarnell, 2015), and has a core role for the
narrative self (Davey & Harrison, 2018). The DMN represents global meaning of
passages: as Barthes (1975) puts it, narrative is moving along, “limping” (p.270), in a
running interpretation as each new element continuously changes the meaning of the
total from which the elements contextually derive and develop meaning. Significant for
ELT, DMN narrative brain regions are common “across both individuals and languages”
(Dehghani et al., 2017, p.6098).

Jung (1927) had long ago guessed that archetypal structures are universal and built
pre-experientially into our “brain structure” (p.158). Knox (2001) first connected hard
scientific evidence of innate neural structures, Mark Johnson’s (1987) image schemata,
to Jungian archetypes. Archetypes and the journey are now being connected to DMN
research too (Brody, 2016).

Materials design

“Materials are a crucial element of nearly all language classrooms worldwide, and
research on materials development and use is central to understanding and enhancing
language pedagogy” (Guerrettaz et al., 2018). Materials development frequently begins
from an analysis of context, like societal factors and learner needs, and is connected
closely with curriculum design (Dubin & Olshtain, 1986). Materials design is often
situated in theories of affect, cognition, methodology (Misham & Timmis, 2015), and
SLA and ELT research (Richards, 2006). Materials are today typically seen as
supporting scaffolded series of tasks (Nunan, 2004), and are generally designed around
the basic skills: some combination of listening, speaking, reading, writing, pronunciation,
grammar, vocabulary, discourse, test taking and so on (Tomlinson, 2013, p.335-474 or
Misham & Timmis, 2015, 99-161). Narrative faculty has not been seen as one of the
basic skills, instead it intersects with skills teaching; narrative has in fact been present
through almost every period of language teaching’s development due to its connection
via literature with grammar translation (Khatib, Rezaei, & Derakhshan, 2011), and the
literary texts language teaching has been based on going back into the Roman period
(Kelly, 1969).
 8

Detailed checklists have been developed that recommend the organizing (Maley, 2013,
p.178) and staging of activities (Tomlinson, 2013, 110); and for analyzing materials and
the content, exercises, and activities of which they are composed, and the ways
learners are expected to interact with them and each other (Miekley, 2005 or Littlejohn,
2011). After piloting or having observed how materials actually performed, they are
revised (Tomlinson, 2013, p.5).

Action research

Methodology and identity in the teacher/developer—materials—learner chain-link

A distinction can be drawn between a rational level of approach to research in language

teaching and learning, and a “narrative turn” (Barkhuizen, Benson & Chik, 2014, p.1-2).
An autoethnographic reflective analysis of my own teacher/developer identify would
serve as a vehicle for action research and study of mythic language and narrative, with
teacher/developer autobiography informing materials design (Davies, 2002), adding to
understanding of the teacher/developer—materials—learner chain-link, and locating
where my own culture and identity leaves blind spots that might interfere (Atkinson &
Delamont, 2006). Moving iteratively, action research (Burns, 2010, p.18-19) well suits
the cycles of trailing and revising in materials development. Kemmis, McTaggart and
Nixon (2014) identify four stages in action research journey cycles:
 Planning
 Action
 Observation
 Reflection.
Spiraling inductively, none of these stages in action research can be prescripted, but at
least in advance I can plan to contextualize my teacher/developer identity within the
Kachruian circles, with respect to the immediate “story”, the local environment “Story”,
and the ideological and large-scale “STORY” levels, and in terms of who, what, and
where, from which whys and hows follow (Barkhuizen, 2018); these levels have some
correlation with how action research is “oriented” in Edge (2001).

The “big story” (Watson, 2007): I am a white Westerner heterosexual male native
speaker. The stories that drive my “investment” in my identity (Norton, 2013) reference
“desire” and “context” (Norton, 2000, p.8). Teaching in Asia since 2003, and in
Indonesia from 2012 means I have a lot of stories behind my teacher identity: lecturing
to Sharia scholars, the arrest and death under mysterious circumstances of my
colleague Kirk Elliott Neville, the conviction of teacher Neil Bantleman, terrorist attacks
on foreigners, pederast co-teachers, atheists arrested, colleagues eloping with students,
an HIV positive co-worker deported, teacher versus academic identity, being a male
teacher of mostly young learners (Henebery, 2015), being politically traditionalist in a
field dominated by critical theory (Waters, 2007, p.354), shocking economic inequality,
or working in high power-distance cultures. These stories have contributed to my view
of myself in ELT, and of the English language, as something subversive, a “subversive
 9

power” (Kruger, 2015, p.156). The “big story” doesn’t reach the end of its journey cycle
until all the years of the entire research project are completed.

By contrast, “small stories”, would be collected longitudinally, not only autobiographical

ones, but from teachers, classroom observers in the form of narrative observations
(Burns, 2010, p.69-70), and learners, and “illuminate how identities are constructed
in…situated contexts” (Vásquez, 2011, p.539): either in the form of open-ended diary
entries at regular or pre-determined stages, and/or as frames that impose a narrative
structure, such as Greimas’s (1984) actantial model or Labov’s (1997) six elements of
narrative.

Given how helpful and open organizations like MATSDA: the Materials Development
Association, MUSE International: Materials Use in Language Classrooms, or MaWSIG:
Material Writing Special Interest Group have been towards my inquiries about mythic
language in materials development, a narrative frame type survey or interviews on
materials developer identity with materials writers is a possible supporting expansion.

Bridging a gap

There is a significant ideological gap between story approaches to ELT and narrative
inquiry: “the development…of the postmodern critical approaches, particularly
poststructuralism and cultural materialism, has brought about a marked devaluation of
the theories of Eliade, Jung and Campbell” (Gill, 2003, p.12). This expresses for
instance in Derrida (1979) writing of narrative oppressing story. But the gap has
sometimes been bridged, examples in TESOL are Culver (2012) who recognizes
“narratives conjure a deep connection with myth” (p.37) and uses the “Hero’s
Journey…monomyth” for a narrative inquiry data collection frame (p.27); Herath and
Valencia (2015) use “poststructuralist theoretical concepts” as the “theoretical
orientation” for their teacher identity research report (p.89), in which they’ve chosen
Joseph Campbell’s “hero’s journey as guiding theme” (p.92); and Otsuji (2015) who
begins her narrative inquiry from Martin Heidegger before turning to Judith Butler: these
being two thinkers who wrote deeply on self and identity: thereby she draws from a
larger circle of post-structuralists, and also, with Heidegger, from elsewhere on the
political spectrum.

As models of identity are behind many aspects of this research proposal, a model of
self-identity is needed that can reckon with a spiritual unified Self versus the conflictual
and pluralistic situated ego, teacher/developer and learner identity, narrative self, L1
and L2 identity, and the post-structuralist politically leftist philosophy heavily informing
learner identity and narrative inquiry of teacher identity in TESOL versus mythic
language which is associated with more rightist and traditionalist political orientations.
While cursive, this search of Google Scholar (12/6/18) is illustrative.
 10

Table 1.
Philosophers cited in TESOL publications on Google Scholar

A very small number of thinkers coming from a similar ideological perspective are cited
just about more often in TESOL than all other philosophers in history combined. But
TESOL can broaden, to illustrate, while Heidegger (also) did not write specifically on
ELT, some of his positions might still be surmised, for instance,

Heidegger’s writings on the essence of language are rather abstruse, even for
those of us who consider ourselves Heidegger scholars….I would suspect that
he would think that [worldwide English teaching] represents the flattening of
language, considering that he thought that the U.K. and America were enthralled
with technology or utility and would probably suggest that the more English is
spoken the more things become mere things to be utilized. (Personal
communication, 2018, Michael Bowler.)
Or,
“what [would] Heidegger…say about English teaching[?] I hope that these few
comments of mine are of some use.… If you take the trouble to read BEING AND
TIME, you will find that he was very upset about superficial talk. … Superficial
talk is not enough… (Personal communication, 2018, Sabrina P. Ramet.)

While these scholars’ remarks can be taken as only a tiny comment on one issue in
ELT, the problem of triviality in materials development (Mukundan, 2008), they suggest
it could be fruitful to situate narrative and identity in TESOL, and materials development,
into the larger philosophical tradition by expanding the post-structuralist sources,
drawing in moderates on the political spectrum, for instance Paul Ricœur who wrote
greatly on narrative identity (1991, 2010), and also philosophers from wider political
orientations for properly grounding the meaning of mythic language to ELT. “Theory
triangulation” (Burns, 2010, p.95-96), a combination of angles on understanding, can
help ensure balanced explanations.

Materials for teaching narrative

“Storied lessons”, for Wajnryb (2003) have three kinds of applications in ELT:
 story for the sake of teaching story, i.e., elements of fiction, point of view,
descriptive writing, and so on,
 11

 story for the sake of teaching language such as literacy, vocabulary, grammar,
cultural competence, or adverbs of sequence, and
 story for the sake of building an “English learning” identity (p.15-17), or “English
self” (Shen, 1988, p.461).
What exact language tasks, skills, or functions might be included as lesson aims with
the narrative materials is pending, dependent on the outcome of a more exhaustive
literature review and analysis of how mythic language can undergird ELT materials, see
more on this point in the next section below.

This action research is designed to evaluate the significance mythic language and L2
identity can have for ELT materials design, not to test other theories of material design,
therefore the materials ought to be relatively standard, conforming “to people’s
expectations of what materials should look like” (Tomlinson, 2013, p.5); they should
probably be in the form of a textbook (or digital file) which is “visually appealing”,
supported with audio files, and having “linguistic, visual, auditory” and possibly
“kinaesthetic” elements (p.2). As the mythic language hypothesis is what is being
tested, an otherwise only conservative and non-controversial theory of language
acquisition should inform materials design such as Willis (1996): exposure, use,
motivation, and instruction.

Narrative aptitude has three components:

 scripts, which are the intuitive appreciation of stories’ structures we have, or the
familiarity learners have with “archetypes, plot structures, different types of
characters and themes…inherited from their ancestors” (Soleimani & Akbari
2013, p.105).
 the narratives themselves of personal or fictional events, and
 retelling (Brown-Haims, 2006).
Narrative aptitude has two directions:
 production and
 comprehension.
And narrative aptitude can be divided into:
 macro-skills like “story grammar” (Westby, 2010), originality and imaginativeness,
or narrative complexity, and into
 micro-skills like cohesive devices, vocabulary, and sentence complexity.
These therefore are the abilities and constructs that need to be taught and assessed.

While neurology suggests macro-narrative is unconnected to language micro-skills like

syntax (Sirigu et al., 1998), speech language pathology (Elleseff, 2017), bilingual
educational research (Uccelli & Páez, 2007), and TESOL research (Crowhurst, 1980)
are suggesting connections, so it is worth assessing and investigating language micro-
skills.
 12

Initial assessment of pre-treatment narrative ability of English learners, during, and after
treatment can be analyzed for what, or if any, benefit was gained from learning with
archetypally enriched materials; or perhaps if mythic language enrichment had any
“negative impact…on the improvement of L2 skills” (Lucarevschi, 2016, p.38).
Classroom observation and teacher and learner feedback could add perspective on how
the materials are in fact really being used (Guerrettaz et al., 2018) or problematic issues
guiding cycles of revision. Given the controversy around both Whorfianism and the
universality of archetypes, attention should be paid in the data collection to how learners
from contrasting Kachruian circles, C1s, or L1s work with the materials. This helps to
contribute to the gap recognized in Lucarevschi’s (2016) suggestions for future
research: the significance of “learners’ L1 background” to using storytelling in ELT
(p.38).

Mythic language in materials development

Relatively uncontroversially, mythic language has relevance to the teaching of narrative

in ELT:
 for its own sake, i.e., teaching elements of fiction (Wajnryb, 2003),
 for the teaching of cultural competence and values (Goh, 1986), and
 for the development of L2 identity (Culver, 2012).
Bringing mythic language into materials for ELT narrative means, enrichment with
archetypal and primordial imagery and language, designing tasks that can uniquely
utilize mythic language for language learning and L2 identity formation, for example
visualization (Ghazanfari, 2011), imparting cultural competence and/or localizing
content as the universality of archetypes and languagaculture issues are controversial,
and teaching teachers (Tomlinson, 2013, p.9), by informing them about mythic language
in the teacher book. Analysis of mythic language, archetypal, and journey content is not
an exact science but has relied on reference to the literature and expert opinion, and the
Archive for Research in Archetypal Symbolism (ARAS) (Chang et al., 2013, p.104).

The RID

Colin Martindale’s (1975a, 1975b) original purpose in developing the Regressive

Imagery Dictionary (RID) was to assess creativity in the arts and predict trends. Like
Jung, Martindale sought to investigate the primordial mind and its “archetypal
structures” (Galetta, 2014, p.7), but unlike Jung, Martindale (2007) was exceedingly
wary of qualitative and non-empirical method (p.1-3); the RID supplies a method for
analyzing mythic language which can otherwise be difficult.

Regressive imagery “is…found in fantasy, reverie, and dreams”, it is contrasted with

conceptual language which “is abstract, logical, reality oriented, and aimed at problem
solving” (Martindale, 1975a). Martindale observed that regressive imagery is more
prevalent in the language of creative people (Martindale & Dailey, 1996), preliterate
societies’ folktales (Martindale, 1976), schizophrenics (West & Martindale, 2012),
younger children (West, Martindale, & Sutton-Smith, 1985), persons under the influence
 13

of certain psychedelic drugs (Martindale & Fischer, 1977), and in the narrative writing of
those having used cannabis (West, Martindale, Hines & Roth, 2010). It might seem
plausible to hypothesize that another group, those for who an L2 identity is developing,
could be added to the list, it isn’t too farfetched to imagine L2 identity formation as
emerging from the primordial mythic mind.

Analysis with the RID (Martindale, 1975a) relies on Provalis’s WordStat software (2018)
or Python (Wiseman, 2007 or Triplett, 2018). RID analysis has been used in a number
of fields of research, literary analysis: Derks (1994), psychotherapy: Hölzer et al. (1996),
political science: (Wiseman, 2007), business management: Densten (2002), and
medicine: Razavi et al. (2002), but it seems not ELT before.

To see whether RID analysis might have any significance for TESOL I first analyzed the
New General Service List (NGSL) (Browne, Culligan & Phillips, 2013).

Figure 1.
Primary and secondary language in the NGSL English word frequency list

Tom Cobb, designer of LexTutorVocabProfile (2004) had guessed, “I suspect there is a

strong crossover between the vocab of archetypes and general high-mid frequency”
(Personal communication, 2018). The opposite proves to be the case: high frequency
words are more abstract and instrumental, whereas more primordial language figures
larger later in the frequency table. An implication is that if L2 identity creation is in fact a
regressive mythic-type event, the expanding volume of materials based on corpus
frequency (McCarthy, McCarten & Sandiford, 2006) may not be supplying what learners
need to support forming their English self. Such materials might also make it difficult for
especially beginner and intermediate learners to express themselves creatively, a
recognized issue with some ELT materials (Maley & Peachey, 2015), or achieve
authenticity, in the Sartrean sense (1971), something also criticized as lacking in ELT
materials (Smith, 2003).

A second batch of data I analyzed also supports RID analysis having some significance
for TESOL. Persuasive writing on the topic of “should students have part-time jobs” by
both EAL (source: ICNALE corpus, 2018) and native English speakers is very low in
 14

primordial vocabulary. By contrast, a basket of narrative writing, of which I used short

stories by professional native English speaker writers like Stephen King and Ursula K.
Le Guin, and also short stories written by native English speaker amateurs for a short
story contest, are around 60% regressive. Meanwhile, an edited collection of short
stories by EAL learners (Krzemiñska-Kaczyñska, Kumar & Perlowski, 2013) drops down
to about 42%, which is comparable to the 45% in short story writing from the bottom
students of my own grade 8 English class at a school in the Jakarta suburbs;
meanwhile, the top students from the same class write using 52% primary vocabulary;
my class’s task was to write a short story with a symbolic character in it, we had just
read Hugh Oliver’s The Christmas gift (2002). While high frequency vocabulary is low in
regressive imagery vocabulary, the range of vocabulary known to the students is itself
probably not sufficient to explain the difference as 7.59% more regressive imagery
separates the top and bottom groups of students’ writing, however the difference in their
vocabulary used beyond the first 1000 most frequent words is only 1.78%, and beyond
2K about 2% when profiled with Compleat Web VPv.2 (Cobb, 2004); i.e., the top
students use the vocabulary they have more effectively for producing more primordial
and better narrative writing. Corpus linguistics has many valuable applications in
TESOL, these RID numbers seem to back, or at least adds a layer of insight, to the
cautioning of Brian Tomlinson (Personal communication, 2018), “what a wonderfully rich
topic for a research study. I've been campaigning for years against the utilitarian
approach to language teaching implied by restricting L2 learners to high frequency
lexis”.

Figure 2.
Primary and secondary language in text-types, native & L2 learners

RID analysis can be useful in assisting the enrichment of materials with mythic
language. RID analysis of corpora of learner production, and materials produced for
ELT could show firstly if ELT materials have tended to be disproportionately secondary,
implying they may not appropriately support L2 identity formation, and secondly, while
people involved in ELT are probably already convinced that narrative uses mythic
language, but since “cognitive processes vary considerably across different
 15

creative…tasks” (Kozbelt et al., 2014), and at the same time, skills and domains of
knowledge are not “solo” (Bruner, 1991, p.3), other language tasks, skills, or functions
may prove to depend significantly more on mythic language than others, leading to their
inclusion as lesson aims and being linked up in the materials design for narrative
teaching.

The ASI

As much as half of brain activity is visual (Zull, 2002). Word-picture combinations have a
powerful sync (Petterson, 2004). The start point of research into the use of pictures in
ELT is often seen as being Corder (1966). Almost all ELT textbooks use pictures
(Wright, 1989, p.187), though very often with little pedagogical reason, only as
decoration (Hill, 2013, p.160). Images are used in assessing narrative ability in both
ELT and also SLP. Due to their importance and the extensive research carried out on
them (Jung, 1964), visual symbols will have a special place in language teaching
materials that would attempt to utilize mythic language.

In a series of tests based on the Archetypal Symbol Inventory (ASI), a set of flashcards
designed against Lehner (1956), Cirlot (2001), and Jung’s (1988) dictionaries of
symbols, and the 14,000 images of the ARAS, Rosen, Smith, Huston and Gonzalez
(1991), Brown and Hannigan (2006), Sotirova‐Kohli, Rosen, Smith, Henderson and
Taki‐Reece (2011), Bradshaw and Storm (2013) and Sotirova-Kohli et al. (2013)
demonstrated a memory advantage ranging from statistically significant up to almost
“10%” when vocabulary is paired with an associated archetypal image as compared to
when it is mismatched (Lance Storm, personal communication, 2018); implying an
exception to the total arbitrariness of the signifier-signified relationship (de Saussure,
1915). These tests were run across language groups, involving English, German, and
Spanish speakers, and also the Chinese characters used in Japanese, suggesting
possible application for language teaching. While some critics have wanted to clump
analytic psychology together with parapsychology and astrology, archetype-based
vocabulary learning is not exactly a “Crystals in the classroom” (Power, 2000) affair
because there is empirical evidence for archetypal memory advantage.

Together, the literature, expert opinion, the ARAS, and derivative tools like the ASI and
RID analysis supply guidance on how materials for teaching narrative in ELT can be
enriched with mythic language.

Table 2.
Materials enriched and impoverished with archetypal imagery & mythic language
Enriched Impoverished
ARAS and ASI imagery…………………………… Abstract and photo-realistic images

Rich in RID primary vocabulary…………….……. Low in RID primary vocabulary

Complete narration cycles…………………….….. Parts of narrations

Paleolithic/Neolithic tales…………...…….…....…. (Post-)modern stories, rearranged narratives

 16

Stock character types………………………..……. Unique characters

Traditional themes: return to fertility, true born

king/princess, heroic sacrifice, etc…...….….….… Modern themes: social justice

Dream content…………………………………..…. Authentic content

Conclusion

No one needs to be convinced that language is archetypal or that story is archetypal, so

it follows that mythic language would have some significance for language learning, and
especially teaching narrative for EAL. L2 identity has been seen as important in
language education and there is a widely accepted connection between narrative and
self-identity. It is not a completely wild speculation to guess that the L2 self emerges
from the mythic level. Narrative, having major importance to language use and in
language assessment, oughtn’t to be taught piece-meal; it’s worthwhile understanding
how materials, something nearly indispensable in language teaching, can be enriched in
their design to use mythic language for the benefit of ELT.

This research proposal contributes to filling a number of gaps for TESOL in knowledge
of the topics, and practically, advancing the field. Firstly, the gap identified by
Lucarevschi (2016) in his suggestions for further research,

No studies compare the effectiveness of the different types of stories and story
formats used in storytelling activities on the development of L2 skills….Research
in the area would be very informative to language teachers, mainly in the
selection of the optimal contents and formats of stories to be used in storytelling
activities during their L2 classes. Moreover, it would be relevant to conduct
comparative studies on the effects of different types of narratives on the
development of learners’ receptive and productive skills. (p.38-39)

Secondly, to appreciating the teacher/developer—materials—learner chain-link, of

which Clarke (2016) puts it well in saying,

Recognition of the role of psychoanalytic notions, such as the unconscious,

desire, and the imaginary, symbolic and real registers of the psyche, raises
intriguing questions of language teacher identity research, which include,
amongst other things, thinking about how symbolic identification operates across
multiple languages and how this might be experienced similarly and/or differently
among teachers and learners. (p.268)

And thirdly, to Guerrettaz et al. (2018) who asked, “what is the relationship between
language classroom materials use and questions of identity as they relate to language
learners?” (p.42).
 17

Optional additional synergistic materials test

This is a supplementary test that would use the developed materials and depends on
support and ethical board review.

Analytic psychology has generally disproved of the use of psychoactive substances as

Jung himself frowned on it (Jung, 1976). TESOL however has sometimes looked into it,
for Guiora, Beit-Hallahmi, Brannon, Dull and Scovel (1972) the benefits of alcohol for
ELT, and benzodiazepines by Guiora, Acton, Erard and Strickland (1980). For both of
these studies, theory of identity figured significantly in models of “language self” and
“ego permeability”.

Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) is the psychoactive constituent in cannabis. As I found

and described above, primary language has an association with better L2 story writing
by English learners. West, Martindale, Hines and Roth (2010) had found that
“marijuana, relative to placebo, caused subjects to write stories with a higher proportion
of primary process content than they had included in baseline stories”. This may be
because administration of THC to subjects causes less deactivation of the DMN
(Bossong et al., 2013), a region of the brain believed be central to narrative faculty
(Wise & Braga, 2014), and reduces task directed activity: an important component of
secondary language is “instrumental behavior” (Martindale, 1975a). This all may not be
surprising given other research (Schafer et al., 2012) and popular conception that THC
boosts creativity.

A trial could aim at discovering if strategic use of THC can improve English L2 narrative
learning, and if so, how. Cannabis use does not interfere with verbal fluency (Morrison
et al., 2009), but does impair working memory (Hart et al., 2001), and attentional tasks
(Morrison et al., 2009). Hence, knowledge product transfer, narrative micro-skills, or
intensive reading for narrative comprehension wouldn’t be the skills to test THC for
benefit with, but instead areas like story brainstorming, the writing process, or creative
tasks like thematic analysis.

Research on cannabis is currently important as increasing decriminalization means

previously tightly controlled applications may become easily implementable.

Biodata

Richard J. Stockton is an English language teacher. His earlier presentations and

publications are on haptics in language teaching, on cultural content analysis of
Indonesian school textbooks, and on developing ELTMAC. Hailing from the snowy
Canadian prairies, he has taught EFL learners in various settings in Asia. His
professional interests include young learners, historical development of language
learning, and intersections of TESOL with philosophy.
 18

References

Aarne-Thompson-Uther classification of folk tales: Multilingual folk tale database.

(2016). Retrieved from http://www.mftd.org/index.php?action=home

Abrashid, R. (2012). Vocabulary learning among less proficient young adults using
children's stories. Mextesol Journal, 35(1), 15-28.

Adaskou, K., Britten, D., & Fahsi, B. (1990). Design decisions on the cultural content of
a secondary English course for Mororcco. ELT Journal, 44(1), 3-10.

Aristotle. (1984). Metaphysics. In The complete works of Aristotle. The revised Oxford
translation (Vol.II) (J. Barnes, Trans.). USA: Princeton.

Aristotle. (2000). Poetics (S.H. Butcher, Trans.). USA: A Penn State Electronic Classics
Series Publication.

Atkinson, P. & Delamont, S. (2006). Rescuing narrative from qualitative

research. Narrative Inquiry, 16(1), 164-172.

Atta-Alla, M.N. (2012). Integrating language skills through storytelling. English

Language Teaching, 5(12), 1-13.

Auden, W.H. (1968). The quest hero. In N.D. Isaacs & R.A. Zimbardo (Eds.), Tolkien
and the critics: J.R.R. Tolkien’s The lord of the rings (pp.40-61). London:
University of Notre Dame Press.

Bakhtin, M. (1981). The dialogic imagination: Four essays by M. M. Bakhtin (C.

Emerson & M. Holquist, Trans.). USA: University of Texas Press.

Bardovi-Harlig, K. (1995). A narrative perspective on the development of the

tense/aspect system in second language acquisition. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, 17(2), 263-291.

Barkhuizen, G. (2011). Narrative knowledging in TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 45(3), 391-

414.

Barkhuizen, G. (2014). Narrative research in language teaching and learning. Language

Teaching, 47(4), 450-466.

Barkhuizen, G. (2016). A short story approach to analyzing teacher (imagined) identities

over time. TESOL Quarterly, 50(3), 655-683.

Barkhuizen, G. (2018). An introduction to narrative inquiry for language teachers

[Conference presentation]. ICE3LT, Jogjakarta, Indonesia.
 19

Barkhuizen, G., Benson, P & Chik, A. (2014). Narrative inquiry in language teaching
and learning research. New York: Routledge.

Barron, D.S. & Yarnell, S. (2015). Default mode network: The basics for psychiatrists.
National Neuroscience Curriculum Initiative. Retrieved from
https://www.nncionline.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/DMN_p4.pdf

Barthes, R. (1975). An introduction to the structural analysis of narrative. New Literary

History, 6(2), 237-272.

Bell, J.S. (2002). Narrative research in TESOL: Narrative inquiry: More than just telling
stories. TESOL Quarterly, 36(2), 207-213.

Block, D. (2003). The social turn in second language acquisition. Washington, DC:
Georgetown University.

Booker, C. (2004). The seven basic plots: Why we tell stories. London: Continuum.

Bossong, M.G., Jansma, J.M., van Hell, H.H., Jager, G., Kahn, R.S. & Ramsey, N.F.
(2012). Default Mode Network in the Effects of D9-Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC)
on Human Executive Function. PLOS ONE, 8(7), 1-10.

Bradshaw, S. & Storm, L. (2013). Archetypes, symbols and the apprehension of

meaning. International journal of Jungian studies, 5(2), 154-176.

Brody, J.D. (2016). Acting, archetype, and neuroscience: Superscenes for rehearsal
and performance. UK: Routledge.

Broome, F.H. (2003). A “TESOL” application of three George MacDonald fairy

tales. North Wind: A Journal of George MacDonald Studies, 22(1), 21-30.

Brown, J.M. & Hannigan, T.P. (2006). An empirical test of Carl Jung’s collective
unconscious (archetypal) memory. Journal of Border Educational Research, 5,
114-120.

Browne, C., Culligan, B. & Phillips, J. (2013). New general service list. Retrieved from
http://www.newgeneralservicelist.org

Brown-Haims, M. (2006). Narrative intervention in a language-literacy group

[Conference presentation]. ASHA Convention, Massachusetts, USA.

Bruner, J.S. (1991). The narrative construction of reality. Critical Inquiry, 18, 1-21.

Bruner, J.S. (2002). Making stories: Law, literature, life. Cambridge, Massachusetts:
Harvard University Press.
 20

Buckner, R.L., Andrews-Hanna J.R. & Schacter, D.L. (2008). The Brain’s Default
Network: Anatomy, Function, and Relevance to Disease. Annals of the New York
Academy of Sciences, 1124, 1–38.

Burns, A. (2010). Doing action research in English language teaching: A guide for
practitioners. New York & London: Routledge.

Campbell, J. (2004). The hero with a thousand faces. USA: Princeton University Press.

Chang, H. M., Ivonin, L., Díaz, M., Català, A., Chen, W. & Rauterberg, M. (2013). From
mythology to psychology: Identifying archetypal symbols in movies. Technoetic
Arts, 11(2), 99-113.

Cirlot, J.E. (2001). A dictionary of symbols (J. Sage, Trans.). London: Routledge.

Clarke, M. (2016). The intimate alterity of identity. In G. Barkhuizen (Ed.) Reflections

on language teacher identity research. New York: Routledge.

Cobb, T. (2004). Compleat Web VPv.2 [Computer program]. Retrieved from

https://www.lextutor.ca/vp/comp/

Corder, S.P. (1966). The visual element in language teaching. UK: Longman.

Creuzer, F. (1837). Symbolik und Mythologie der altenVölker: Besonders der

Griechen (Vol. 1) [Symbolism and mythology of ancient peoples: especially the
Greeks]. Germany: Leske.

Culver, O. (2012). Narrative inquiry in the language classroom: An incubator of identity

and growth exploration [Master’s thesis]. SIT Graduate Institute, Brattleboro,
USA.

Derrida, J. (1979). Living on: Borderlines (J. Hulbert, Trans.). In H. Bloom et al.
(Eds.), Deconstruction and criticism. UK: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Davey, C. G., & Harrison, B. J. (2018). The brain's center of gravity: how the default
mode network helps us to understand the self. World Psychiatry, 17(3), 278-279.

Davies, A. (2002). Using teacher‐generated biography as input material. ELT

journal, 56(4), 368-379.

Dehghani, M., Boghrati, R., Man, K., Hoover, J., Gimbel, S.I., Vaswani, A. & Kaplan,
J.T. (2017). Decoding the neural representation of story meanings across
languages. Human Brain Mapping, 38(12), 6096-6106.

Densten, I. L. (2002). Clarifying inspirational motivation and its relationship to extra

effort. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 23(1), 40-44.
 21

Derks, P. L. (1994). Clockwork Shakespeare: The Bard meets the regressive imagery
dictionary. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 12(2), 131-139.

de Saussure, F. (1915). Course in general linguistics (W. Baskin, Trans.). New York:
McGraw-Hill Book Company.

Domhoff, G.W., & Fox, K.C. (2015). Dreaming and the default network: A review,
synthesis, and counterintuitive research proposal. Consciousness and
Cognition, 33, 342-353.

Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative,

and mixed methodologies. UK: Oxford University Press.

Dubin, F. & Olshtain, E. (1986). Course design: Developing programs and materials for
language learning. UK: Cambridge University Press.

Edge, J. (Ed.). (2001). Action research: Case studies in TESOL practice. Alexandria:
TESOL.

Eliade, M. (1963). Myth and reality (W.R. Trask, Trans). New York: Harper & Row
Publishers.

Elleseff, T. (2017). The importance of narrative assessments in speech language

pathology (Revised). Smart speech therapy: Bilingual pediatric speech therapy
products, services and resources. Retrieved from
https://www.smartspeechtherapy.com/revised-narrative-assessments-in-speech-
language-pathology/

Elkılıç, G. & Akça, C. (2008). Attitudes of the students studying at Kafkas University
private primary EFL classroom towards storytelling and motivation. Journal of
Language and Linguistic Studies, 4(1), 1-27.

Etherington, K. (2013). Narrative approaches to case studies [PowerPoint

Presentation]. Keele University, Newcastle, UK.

Flanagan, O.J. (1992). Consciousness reconsidered. USA: MIT Press.

Frankfort, H., Frankfort, H.A, Wilson, J.A., Jacobsen, T. & Irwin, W.A. The intellectual
adventure of ancient man: An essay on speculative thought in the ancient Near
East. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Frazer, J.G. (1922). The golden bough. USA: Temple of Earth Publishing.
 22

Galetta, G. (2014). Introduction to precognitive aesthetics: a Jungian approach

[Conference paper]. 31st International Conference on Psychology and the Arts,
Madrid, Spain.

Ghazanfari, M. (2011). The role of visualization in EFL learners’ reading comprehension

and recall of short stories. Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies, 1(1), 1-
23.

Gill, G.R. (2003). Northrop Frye and the phenomenology of myth [Doctoral thesis].
McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.

Gillam, R.B. & Pearson, N.A. (2017). Test of narrative language, Second edition. USA:
PRO-ED.

Giovanelli, M. (2018). Narrative: Cambridge elevate edition. UK: Cambridge University

Press.

Goh, L. (1986). Using myth, folktales and fairy tales in the adult ESL classroom
[Master’s thesis]. Simon Fraser University, Vancouver, Canada.

Gould, M. & Rankin, M. (2014). Cambridge International AS and A level: English

language. UK: Cambridge University Press.

Greimas, A.J. (1984). Structural semantics: An attempt at a method (A. Velie, D.

McDowell & R. Schleifer, Trans.). USA: University of Nebraska Press.

Guerrettaz, A.M., Grandon, M., Lee, S., Mathie, C., Berwick, A., Murray, A. & Pourhaji,
A. (2018). Materials use and development: Synergetic processes and research
prospects. Folio 18(2), 37-44.

Guiora, A.Z., Beit-Hallahmi, B., Brannon, R.C., Dull, C.Y. & Scovel, T. (1972). The
effects of experimentally induced changes in ego states on pronunciation ability
in a second language: An exploratory study. Comprehensive Psychiatry, 13(5),
421-428.

Guiora, A.Z., Acton, W.R., Erard, R. & Strickland Jr, F.W. (1980). The effects of
benzodiazepine (valium) on permeability of language ego boundaries 1.
Language Learning, 30(2), 351-361.

Hamburger, K. (1993). The logic of literature. USA: Indiana University Press.

Hart C.L., van Gorp W., Haney M., Foltin R.W. & Fischman M.W. (2001). Effects of
acute smoked marijuana on complex cognitive performance.
Neuropsychopharmacology, 25(5), 757-765.
 23

Henebery, Brett. (2015, October 1). What’s behind the shortage of male teachers?
The Educator. Retrieved from http://www.educatoronline.com.au/news/whats-
behind-the-shortage-of-male-teachers-206203.aspx

Herath, S. & Valencia, M. (2014). Neither “A complete insider” nor “A complete

outsider”: Autoethnographies of two teacher-educators-in-the-making. In Y.L.
Cheung, S.B. Said & K-H. Park (Eds.). Advances and current trends in language
teacher identity research (pp. 86-101). UK: Routledge.

Hill, D.A. (2011). The visual elements in EFL coursebooks. In Tomlinson, B. (Ed.)
Materials development in language teaching (pp. 1757-167). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

Hölzer, M., Mergenthaler, E., Pokorny, D., Kächele, H., & Luborsky, L. (1996).
Vocabulary measures for the evaluation of therapy outcome: Re-studying
transcripts from the Penn Psychotherapy Project. Psychotherapy Research, 6(2),
95-108.

Huang, H.L. (2006). The effects of storytelling on EFL young learners’ reading
comprehension and word recall. English Teaching & Learning, 30(3), 51-74.

Hyvärinen, M., 2008. Analyzing narratives and story-telling. In L. Bickman, P. Alasuutari

& J. Brannen (Eds.). The SAGE handbook of social research methods, pp.447-
460.

Hsu, Y. (2010). The influence of English storytelling on the oral language complexity of
EFL primary students [Master’s thesis]. National Yunlin University of Science &
Technology, Yunlin, Taiwan.

Johnson, M. (1987). The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination,
and reason. USA: University of Chicago Press.

Johnson, K.E. & Golombek, P.R. (2002). Inquiry into experience: Teachers' personal
professional growth. In K.E. Johnson & P.R. Golombek, Teachers' narrative
inquiry as professional development (pp.1-14). Cambridge University Press.

Jung, C.G. (1917). Individuation. In Collected works (Vol, 7, pp.173-187). London:

Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Jung, C.G. (1927). The structure of the psyche. In Collected works (Vol. 8, pp.139-158).
London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Jung, C.G. (1933). A study of the process of individuation. Eranos Conference,

Ascona, Switzerland.
 24

Jung, C.G. (1947). On the nature of the psyche. Collected works (Vol. 8, pp.159–234).
London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Jung, C.G. (1976). Letters, Vol. 2: 1951-1961(J. Hulen, Trans.). UK: Routledge.

Jung, C.G. (1988). (Ed.) Man and his symbols. New York: Doubleday.

Kachru, B.B. (1985). Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English
language in the outer circle. In R. Quirk R. & H. Widdowson (Eds.), English in the
World. UK: Cambridge University Press.

Kachru, B.B. (1991). World Englishes and applied linguistics. In M.A.K. Halliday, John
Gibbons & H. Nicholas (Eds.), Learning, Keeping, and Using Language, Vol II.
(pp.40-61). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Kant, I. (1998). Critique of pure reason. (P. Guyer & A.W. Wood, Trans.). USA:
Cambridge University Press.

Kaplan, R. B. (1966). Cultural thought patterns in inter‐cultural education. Language

learning, 16(1‐2), 1-20.

Kelly, L.G. (1969). 25 centuries of language teaching: An inquiry into the science, art,
and development of language teaching methodology 500 BC – 1969. USA:
Newbury House Publishers.

Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2014). The action research planner: Doing
critical participatory action research. Singapore: Springer.

Khatib, M., Rezaei, S. & Derakhshan, A. (2011). Literature in EFL/ESL classroom.

English Language Teaching, 4(1), 201-208.

Knox, J.M. (2001). Memories, fantasies, archetypes: An exploration of some

connections between cognitive science and analytical psychology. Journal of
Analytical Psychology, 46(4), 613-635.

Kozbelt, A., Dexter, S., Dolese, M., Meredith, D., & Ostrofsky, J. (2015). Regressive
imagery in creative Problem‐Solving: Comparing verbal protocols of expert and
novice visual artists and computer programmers. The Journal of Creative
Behavior, 49(4), 263-278.

Kruger, F.J. (2015). Mapping peace and violence in the TESOL classroom [Doctoral
thesis]. University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa.

Krzemiñska-Kaczyñska, A., Kumar, M.K. & Perlowski, J. (2013). The power of

international stories: Coming of age in the global village. India: Bureau of
Educational and Cultural Affairs (ECA) of the U.S. Department of State, through
a program administered by IREX (International Research & Exchanges Board).
 25

Kühn, S., Ritter, S.M., Müller, B.C., Van Baaren, R.B., Brass, M. & Dijksterhuis, A.
(2014). The importance of the default mode network in creativity—A structural
MRI study. The Journal of Creative Behavior, 48(2), 152-163.

Labov, W. (1997). Some further steps in narrative analysis. The Journal of Narrative
and Life History. Retrieved from https://www.ling.upenn.edu/~wlabov/sfs.html

Lehner, E. (1956). The picture book of symbols. New York: William Penn.

Lévi-Strauss, C. (1984). Structure and form: Reflections on a work by VladimirPropp.

Structural Anthropology, 2, 115-145.

Lévy-Bruhl, L. (1985). How natives think (L.A. Clare, Trans.). USA: Princeton
University Press.

Littlejohn, A. (2011). The analysis of language teaching materials: Inside the Trojan
Horse. In Tomlinson, B. (Ed.) Materials development in language teaching (pp.
179-211). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lucarevschi, C.R. (2016). The role of storytelling in language learning: A literature

review. Working Papers of the Linguistics Circle of the University of Victoria,
26(1), 23–44.

Lucarevschi, C.R. (2018). The role of storytelling in the development of pronunciation of

Brazilian learners of English as a foreign language [Doctoral thesis]. University
of Victoria, Victoria, Canada.

Malderez, A. (2010). Stories in ELT: Telling tales in school. Procedia Social and
Behavioral Sciences, 3, 7-13.

Maley, A. (2013). Creative approaches to writing materials. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.)

Developing materials for language teaching (2nd Ed.) (pp. -167-187). London:
Bloomsbury Academic.

Maley, A. & Peachey, N. (2015). Creativity in the English language classroom. London:
British Council.

Miekley, J. (2005). ESL textbook evaluation checklist. The Reading Matrix, 5(2).

Mar, R.A. (2004). The neuropsychology of narrative: Story comprehension, story

production and their interrelation. Neuropsychologia, 42(10), 1414-1434.

Martindale, C. (1975a). Regressive imagery dictionary [Computer program]. Wordstat.

Provalis Research, Canada. Retrieved from
 26

https://provalisresearch.com/products/content-analysis-software/wordstat-
dictionary/regressive-imagery-dictionary/

Martindale, C. (1975b). Romantic progression: The psychology of literary history. New

York: Halsted Press.

Martindale, C. (1976). Primitive mentality and the relationship between art and society.
Scientific Aesthetics, 1, 5-18.

Martindale, C. (2007). Response: Psychological foundations of literary theory. JLT

Articles, 1(2), 1-6.

Martindale, C. & Dailey, A. (1996). Creativity, primary process cognition, and

personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 20, 409-414.

Martindale, C. & Fischer, R. (1977). The effects of psilocybin on primary process

content in language. Confinia Psychiatrica, 20, 195-202.

Mayes, C. (2005). Jung and education: Elements of an archetypal pedagogy. USA:

Rowman and Littlefield Education.

McCarthy, M., McCarten, J. & Sandiford, H. (2006). Touchstone level 3 student book
with audio CD/CD-ROM. UK: Cambridge University Press.

Misham, F. & Timmis, I. (2015). Materials development for TESOL. Great Britain:
Edinburgh University Press.

Morrison P.D., Zois V., McKeown D.A., Lee T.D., Holt D.W., Powell J.F., Kapur S. &
Murray R.M. (2009). The acute effects of synthetic intravenous Δ 9-
tetrahydrocannabinol on psychosis, mood and cognitive functioning.
Psychological Medicine, 39(10), 1607-1616.

Mukundan, J. (2008). Agendas of the state in developing world English language

textbooks. Folio, 12(2), 17-19.

Norton, B. (1997). Language, identity, and the ownership of English. TESOL

Quarterly, 31(3), 409-429.

Norton, B. (2000). Identity and language learning: Gender, ethnicity and educational
change. UK: Pearson Education Limited.

Norton, B. (2013). Identity and language learning: Extending the conversation. UK:
Multilingual matters.

Nunan, D. (2004).Task-based language teaching. Cambridge: University of Cambridge

Press.
 27

Nunan, D. & Choi, J. (2010). Language and culture: Reflective narratives and the
emergence of identity. New York: Routledge.

Ochs, E. & Capps, L. (2009). Living narrative: Creating lives in everyday storytelling.
USA: Harvard University Press.

Oliver, H. (2002). The Christmas gift. In M. Royston (Ed.) A New Windmill book of very
short stories (pp. 21-24). Oxford: Heinemann New Windmills.

Otsuji, E. (2015). Where am I from: Performative and ‘metro’ perspectives of origin. In

Y.L. Cheung, S.B. Said & K-H. Park (Eds.). Advances and current trends in
language teacher identity research (pp. 86-101). UK: Routledge.

Oxford, R.L. (1990). Styles, strategies, and aptitude: Connections for language
learning. In T.S. Parry & C.W. Stansfield (Eds.) Language aptitude reconsidered.
New Jersey: Prentice Hall.

Oxford, R.L. (2003). Language learning styles and strategies: An overview

[Conference presentation]. Greek Applied Linguistics Association, Illinois, USA.

Peterson, J.B. (2017a). Archetypes in fairy tales [Video file]. Retrieved from
https://youtu.be/_q4sEaV2rAE

Peterson, J.B. (2017b).The Best Disney Movies! The Rubin Report [Video file].
Retrieved from https://youtu.be/HUkiFxBVpZM

Petterson, R. (2004) Gearing communications to the cognitive needs of students:

Findings from visual literacy research. Journal of Visual Literacy, 24(2), 129-154.

Polti, G. (1924). The thirty-six dramatic situations (L. Ray, Trans.). Franklin, Ohio:
James Knapp Reeve.

Power, P. (2000). Crystals in the classroom. IATEFL ISSUES, 4(4).

Price, G. (1973). The grammar of stories. The Netherlands: Mouton & Co.

Propp, V. (1968). Morphology of the folktale (L. Scott, Trans.). USA: University of Texas
Press.

Propp, V. (2000). Историчекиекорниволшебнойсказки [Historical roots of the

wondertale]. Moscow: Хгбиринт.

Quellmalz, E.S., Capell, F.J., & Chou, C.P. (1982). Effects of discourse and response
mode on the measurement of writing competence. Journal of Educational
Measurement, 19(4), 241-258.
 28

Raichle, M. E., MacLeod, A. M., Snyder, A. Z., Powers, W. J., Gusnard, D. A. &
Shulman, G. L. (2001). Inaugural Article: A default mode of brain
function. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 98(2), 676–682.

Ramana Maharshi. (2002). The teachings of Bhagavan Sri Ramana Maharshi in his
own words (A. Osborne, Trans.). India: V.S. Ramanan.

Razavi, D., Delvaux, N., Marchal, S., Durieux, J. F., Farvacques, C., Dubus, L., &
Hogenraad, R. (2002). Does training increase the use of more emotionally laden
words by nurses when talking with cancer patients? A randomised study. British
Journal of Cancer, 87(1), 1.

Research notes, Issue 7. (2002). UK: UCLES.

Research notes, Issue 10. (2002). UK: UCLES.

Ricœur, P. (1991). Narrative identity (M.S. Muldoon, Trans.). Philosophy Today 35(1),
73-81

Ricœur, P. (2010). Time and narrative (Vol. 3) (K. Blamey & D. Pellauer, Trans.). USA:
University of Chicago.

Richards, J.C. (2006). Materials development and research—making the

connection. RELC Journal, 37(1), 5-26.

Rosen, D.H., Smith, S.M., Huston, H.L.& Gonzalez, G. (1991). Empirical study of
associations between symbols and their meanings: Evidence of collective
unconscious (archetypal) memory. Journal of analytical psychology, 36(2), 211-
228.

Sartre, J.P. (1971). Being and nothingness: An essay in phenomenological ontology

(Barnes, H.E., Trans.). New York: Citadel Press.

Schafer, G., Feilding, A., Morgan, C.J., Agathangelou, M., Freeman, T.P., & Curran,
H.V. (2012). Investigating the interaction between schizotypy, divergent thinking
and cannabis use. Consciousness and Cognition, 21(1), 292-298.

Schank, R.C. (1995). Tell me a story: Narrative and intelligence. USA: Northwestern
University Press.

Schneider, E.W. (2003). The dynamics of new Englishes: From identity construction to
dialect birth. Language, 79(2), 233-281.

Schneider, P., Dubé, R.V. & Hayward, D. (2005). The Edmonton narrative norms
instrument (ENNI). University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
 29

Segal, R. A. (2014). On Mills'‘Jung's Metaphysics’. International Journal of Jungian

Studies, 6(3), 217-226.

Semetsky, I. & Delpech‐Ramey, J.A. (2012). Jung's psychology and Deleuze's

philosophy: The unconscious in learning. Educational Philosophy and
Theory, 44(1), 69-81.

Shelburne, W.A. (1988). Mythos and logos in the thought of Carl Jung: The theory of the
collective unconscious in scientific perspective. USA: State University of New
York Press.

Shen, F. (1988). The classroom and the wider culture: Identity as a key to learning
English composition. College Composition and Communication, 40(4), 459-460
Silvonen, V. (2018). Mind, emotion and mythic thinking [Call for papers]. Helsinki,
Finland. Retrieved from https://blogs.helsinki.fi/mind-emotion/cfp/

Sirigu, A., Cohen, L., Zalla, T., Pradat-Diehl, P., Van Eeckhout, P. & Grafman, J. et al.
(1998). Distinct frontal regions for processing sentence syntax and story
grammar. Cortex, 34, 297–310.
Smith, D. (2003). Uncovering the spiritual dimension of language teaching [Conference
presentation]. TESOL, Baltimore, USA.

Soleimani, H. & Akbari, M. (2013). The effect of storytelling on children's learning

English vocabulary: A case in Iran. International Research Journal of Applied and
Basic Sciences, 4(11), 4005-4014.

Sotirova‐Kohli, M., Rosen, D.H., Smith, S.M., Henderson, P., & Taki‐Reece, S. (2011).
Empirical study of Kanji as archetypal images: Understanding the collective
unconscious as part of the Japanese language. Journal of Analytical
Psychology, 56(1), 109-132.

Sotirova-Kohli, M., Opwis, K., Roesler, C., Smith, S.M., Rosen, D.H., Vaid, J., & Djonov,
V. (2013). Symbol/meaning paired-associate recall: An “archetypal memory”
advantage? Behavioral Sciences, 3(4), 541-561.

Spengler, O. (1937). Decline of the West, (C.F. Atkinson, Trans.). New York: Alfred A.
Knopf.

St. George, M., Kutas, M., Martinez, A., & Sereno, M. I. (1999). Semantic integration in
reading: engagement of the right hemisphere during discourse processing.
Brain, 122(7), 1317-1325.

Stockton, R.J. (forthcoming). Developing English language teaching metaphorical

associative cards (ELTMAC): Complete report. Humanizing Language Teaching
Magazine. April, 2019. Retrieved from
 30

https://www.academia.edu/37928528/Developing_English_Language_Teaching_
Metaphorical_Associative_Cards_ELTMAC_Complete_Report

Stockton, R.J. (forthcoming). Developing English language teaching metaphorical

associative cards (ELTMAC): Complete report. Humanizing Language Teaching
Magazine. April, 2019. Retrieved from
https://www.academia.edu/37928528/Developing_English_Language_Teaching_
Metaphorical_Associative_Cards_ELTMAC_Complete_Report

Taylor, E.B. (1920). Primitive culture: Research into the development of mythology,
philosophy, religion, language, art, and custom. London: John Murray.

Todorov, T. (1971). The 2 principles of narrative. Diacritics 1(1), 37-44.

Tomlinson, B. (Ed.). (2013). Developing materials for language teaching (2nd Ed.).
London: Bloomsbury Academic.

Triplett, J. (2018). Regressive-imagery-dictionary 0.1.8 [Computer program].

Retrieved from https://pypi.org/project/regressive-imagery-dictionary/

Uccelli, P. & Páez, M. M. (2007). Narrative and vocabulary development of bilingual

children from kindergarten to first grade: Developmental changes and
associations among English and Spanish skills. Language, Speech, and Hearing
Services in Schools.

Uther, H.J. (2009). Classifying tales: Remarks to indexes and systems of ordering.
Folks Art-Croatian Journal of Ethnology and Folklore Research, 46(1), 15-32.

Vásquez, C. (2011). TESOL, Teacher identity, and the need for ‘‘Small Story’’ research.
TESOL Quarterly, 45(3), 535-545.

Veling, W., Selten, J. P., Veen, N., Laan, W., Blom, J. D. & Hoek, H. W. (2006).
Incidence of schizophrenia among ethnic minorities in the Netherlands: a four-
year first-contact study. Schizophrenia Research, 86(1-3), 189-193.

Wajnryb, R. (2003). Stories: Narrative activities in the classroom. UK: Cambridge

University Press.

Waters, A. (2007). Ideology, reality, and false consciousness in ELT. ELT Journal,
61(4), 367-368.

Watson, C. (2007). Small stories, positioning analysis, and the doing of professional
identities in learning to teach. Narrative Inquiry, 17, 371–389.

West, A.N., & Martindale, C. (1988). Primary process content in paranoid schizophrenic
speech. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 149(4), 547-553.
 31

West, A., Martindale, C., Hines, D. & Roth, W.T. (2010). Marijuana-induced primary
process thought in the TAT. Journal of Personality Assessment, 47(5), 466-467.

West, A.N. Martindale, C.& Sutton-Smith, B. (1985). Age trends in the content of
children's spontaneous fantasy narratives. Genetic, Social, and General
Psychology Monographs, 111, 389-405.

Westby, C. (2010). Language and literacy learning in a multimedia world. Bilingual

Multicultural Services, Albuquerque, USA. Retrieved from
https://www.asha.org/events/convention/handouts/2010/1604-westby-carol/

Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. Harlow: Addison-Wesley

Longman.

Wise, R.J. & Braga, R.M. (2014). Default mode network: the seat of literary creativity?
Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(3), 116-117.

Wiseman, J. (2007). The regressive imagery dictionary [Computer program].

Retrieved from
http://lemonodor.com/archives/2007/05/the_regressive_imagery_dictionary.html

WordStat content analysis dictionaries [Computer program]. (2018). Provalis Research.

Retrieved from https://provalisresearch.com/products/content-analysis-
software/wordstat-dictionary/

Wright, A. (1989). Pictures for language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Young, K. & Saver, J. L. (2001). The neurology of narrative. SubStance, 94/94, 72-84.

Zull, J.E. (2002). The art of changing the brain: Enriching teaching by exploring the
biology of learning. Virginia: Stylus Publishing.