Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T20:49:30.779Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Short fiction writing in English by Chinese university students: An integrated F-A-I-T-H approach

How do Chinese university students use English in creative ways to ‘write truly’ while describing something fictional or ‘untrue’?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 December 2019

Gang Sui
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

When delivering a speech at a meeting of the Writers’ Congress, Ernest Hemingway said as a fiction writer:

A writer's problem does not change. He himself changes, but his problem remains the same. It is always how to write truly and having found what is true, to project it in such a way that it becomes part of the experience of the person who reads it. (1937)

Does this statement still ring true today? If it does, what approach should and can be taken for Chinese university students to write ‘truly’ during their fiction writing workshops in English when they know what they try to accomplish is indeed something fictional or self-evidently ‘untrue’? What characterises the main thematic and stylistic elements of Chinese students’ short stories written in English as creative outcomes?

Type
Research Article
Information
English Today , Volume 37 , Issue 2 , June 2021 , pp. 120 - 126
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bertens, H. & Fokkema, D. W. (eds.) 1997. ‘3.0. Introductory note.’ International Postmodernism: Theory and Literary Practice. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 177–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhabha, H. 1994. The Location of Culture. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Crystal, D. 1999. ‘The future of Englishes,’ English Today, 15(2), 10–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
D'Angelo, F. J. 2010. ‘The rhetoric of intertextuality.’ Rhetoric Review, 29(1), 31–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldstein, D. E. & Shuman, A. 2012. ‘The stigmatized vernacular: where reflexivity meets untellability.’ Journal of Folklore Research, 49(2), 113–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gu, M. D. 2014. ‘Toward a transcultural poetics of fiction: The fusion of narrative visions in Chinese and western fiction studies.’ In Cullhed, A. & Rydholm, L. (eds.), True Lies Worldwide: Fictionality in Global Contexts. Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 203–226.Google Scholar
Gunzenhauser, M. G. 2013. ‘From empathy to creative intersubjectivity in qualitative research.’ In Dennis, B. et al. (eds.), Qualitative Research: A Reader in Philosophy, Core Concepts, and Practice, New York: Peter Lang AG, pp. 57–74.Google Scholar
He, C. & Liu, J. 2008. ‘Cultural identity of Chinese English.’ Journal of Southwest University of Science and Technology, 25(4), 86–90.Google Scholar
Hemingway, E. 1937. ‘Speech at a meeting of the Writers’ Congress.’ Online at <https://spartacus-educational.com/USAhemingway.htm> (Accessed October 12, 2018).+(Accessed+October+12,+2018).>Google Scholar
Herman, L. & Vervaeck, B. 2009. ‘Narrative interest as cultural negotiation.’ Narrative, 17(1), 111–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hutnyk, J. 2005. ‘Hybridity.’ Ethnic and Racial Studies, 28(1), 79–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kachru, B. B. (ed.) 1992. The Other Tongue: English across Cultures (2nd edn.) Urbana & Chicago: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Kirkpatrick, A. & Xu, Z. 2002. ‘Chinese pragmatic norms and “China English”.’ World Englishes, 21(2), 269–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kraidy, M. M. 2005. Hybridity, or the Cultural Logic of Globalization. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Kristeva, J. 1984. Revolution in Poetic Language (trans. Waller, M.). New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Kupchik, C. 2014. ‘Confessions of the hydra: Variations on the concept of fiction in Latin America.’ In Cullhed, A. & Rydholm, L. (eds.), True Lies Worldwide: Fictionality in Global Contexts. Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 289–297.Google Scholar
Mayers, T. 2009. ‘One simple word: From creative writing to creative writing studies.’ College English, 71(3), 217–228.Google Scholar
Meltzer, B. N. & Meltzer, W. J. 2008. ‘Responding to verbal ambiguity: The case of puns.’ In Denzin, N. K. (ed.), Studies in Symbolic Interaction (vol. 30). Bingley: Emerald Publishing Limited, pp.151–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mooij, J. J. A. 1993. Fictional Realities: The Uses of Literary Imagination. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rossholm, G. 2014. ‘General beliefs from fiction.’ In Cullhed, A. & Rydholm, L. (eds.), True Lies Worldwide: Fictionality in Global Contexts. Berlin/Boston: Walter de Gruyter, pp. 227–239.Google Scholar
Wang, M. 2019. ‘New trends of research on syntactic complexity in L2 writing.’ Journal of Beijing International Studies University, 41(2), 81–99.Google Scholar
Xu, Z. 2008. ‘Analysis of syntactic features of Chinese English.’ Asian Englishes, 11(2), 4–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, Z. 2017. ‘Researching Chinese English: A meta-analysis of Chinese scholarship on Chinese English research.’ In Xu, Z. et al. (eds.), Researching Chinese English: The State of the Art, London: Springer International publishing AG, pp. 235–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xu, Z., Deterding, D. & He, D. 2017. ‘What we know about Chinese English: Status, issues and trends.’ In Xu, Z. et al. (eds.), Researching Chinese English: The State of the Art, London: Springer International publishing AG, pp. 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar