Teaching the ordinary in an introduction to literary theory course
An introductory literary theory course can seem distant when it begins with terms such as signifier, discourse and ideology. Ordinary language philosophy offers a different entry point: familiar words and speech acts become objects of close attention. Students can ask what “no worries,” “fair enough” and “not bad” do in use, then examine why literature makes such apparently routine language newly visible.
That shift changes the purpose of theory. Instead of treating the ordinary as the opposite of the literary, teachers and students can investigate the conventions, exclusions and effects that allow a phrase to pass unnoticed until a poem, play or film disturbs it. Wittgenstein’s later work on use, J. L. Austin’s account of performative utterances and Stanley Cavell’s readings of ordinary language become practical tools for interpretation.
For Australian students, the exercise has immediate resonance. Australian English is well known for understatement: “not bad” may express approval, “she’ll be right” can signal patience, and “no worries” can close an exchange without settling every concern. These phrases are heard across Sydney, Melbourne, Brisbane and regional communities, while campus cohorts often bring additional varieties of English and cultural knowledge.
A course built around this approach need not reject difficult theory. It can move from observed usage to philosophical argument and then back to reading, using local speech as a laboratory. The gains are pedagogical: first-year students gain confidence in textual analysis, learn that interpretation has criteria, and encounter philosophy as a disciplined form of curiosity about everyday language.
Ordinary language as a literary problem
Teachers looking for reliable intellectual context can begin with the OLP resource index, which gathers books, reviews, conference records and teaching resources on ordinary language philosophy, literary studies, Cavell and Wittgenstein. Its bibliographies and archived discussions are especially useful for tracing how these fields have been taught, contested and connected rather than presenting criticism as a timeless canon.
The conceptual sequence can be compact. Introduce Austin’s account of doing with words, then Wittgenstein’s language games and forms of life, before turning to Cavell’s claim that ordinary language carries philosophical significance. Ask what is lost when “I promise” is reduced to a description of private intention, and what becomes visible when a poem renders a familiar formula strange.
Planning lessons around language in use
Lesson design works best when students repeatedly move among examples. A short everyday utterance can lead to a close reading, a philosophical distinction and a return to ordinary speech. Students may compare a busker’s request, a character’s apology and a line of verse, documenting who is permitted to speak, what counts as a credible response and which conventions the text expects them to know.
Before discussion, give groups one ordinary phrase and ask them to infer its use, audience and possible consequences without making assumptions about a single “correct” meaning. The following practices keep interpretation accountable to evidence while preserving room for disagreement:
- Collect naturally occurring phrases from campus noticeboards, group chats or overheard speech, with attention to privacy.
- Ask students to classify an utterance as descriptive, performative, expressive or mixed, then revise the classification.
- Stage a disagreement between a literal and a pragmatic reading and identify the textual evidence each relies on.
- Compare Australian understatement with another English variety without treating either as linguistically inferior.
- Rewrite a plain sentence so its literary effect becomes obvious, then explain what has changed.
- End each class by recording one claim, one counter-example and one question that still needs testing.
Cavell and Wittgenstein in the classroom
Cavell and Wittgenstein reward a classroom atmosphere of exactness rather than doctrinal certainty. Cavell’s attention to “what we say” can show how ethical problems are concealed by phrases such as “just being honest” or “following the rules.” Wittgenstein’s remark that a word’s meaning is its use helps students resist the habit of imagining a private definition behind every public expression.
Neither thinker should become a label that closes interpretation. A useful exercise asks what philosophical problem would disappear if the phrase disappeared, and which other words, actions or institutions would have to change. Students then test that hypothesis against a passage, distinguishing an illuminating philosophical connection from a merely decorative allusion.
Australian English and situated learning
Situation matters in Australian higher education, where first-year cohorts may bring together Commonwealth-supported domestic students, many using HECS-HELP, and full-fee international students in the same tutorial. This can make “ordinary English” visibly unstable. The local way of speaking matters, but so do English varieties shaped by multilingual cities such as Mumbai, Jakarta, Seoul and Lagos, and an inclusive account of register should make room for all of them.
Fieldwork need not involve expensive travel. A class in Melbourne can examine the language of tram announcements, shop signs and café orders; a seminar in Canberra can compare parliamentary formulas with student-group messages; and a regional campus can document how distance changes phrases such as “see you next week.” These examples show that ordinary language is situated, not merely statistical.
Assessment, resources and collaborative inquiry
Assessment can recognise movement from use to argument rather than rewarding specialist vocabulary alone. A portfolio might contain annotated examples, a short account of how students revised an interpretation and a brief philosophical commentary on criteria or consequences. Students can submit a final piece that pairs a literary passage with an ordinary utterance, explaining the connection without claiming that the texts mean the same thing.
Even cross-disciplinary resources can sharpen the lesson that concepts become ordinary through repeated local use. Latin American mini-grid cases show how technical language gains practical meaning within particular communities and infrastructures. The analogy is productive when students also identify its limits and ask how context changes what an expression means.
Start with one phrase that students would normally overlook. In the next tutorial, collect examples, test competing interpretations and record the criteria that make one reading stronger than another. Repeating this routine will show students that literary theory begins in the language they already use.
Explore the OLP & Literary Studies Online archive and its curated resources, then adapt a lesson on Austin, Cavell or Wittgenstein for your own classroom. Share the resulting activity, reading list or assessment rubric with the scholarly community.