Menu
AWEJ for Translation & Literary Studies, Volume 4, Number4. October 2020 Pp. 131-150
The goal of this qualitative study is to explore unfamiliar concepts presented in familiar contexts in Austen’s Pride and Prejudice (1813) and Mansfield Park (1814). Also, it intends to examine Austen’s creativity in unfamiliar concepts such as women’s freedom of choice and education from a feminist perspective. This study is significant for shedding light on the empowerment of love decision, females’ self-awareness and women’s voice presented in conventional systems. In addition, it will help feminists to figure out the feminism issues reflected in Austen’s work. Further, this study addresses the question of unfamiliar concepts in Austen’s familiar contexts and identify the impact of decision making on women’s equality. The researcher uses textual analysis to discuss main themes and address research questions. The findings of the study show that Austen best novels preached out women’s emancipation of so-called marriage-market. Also, the result indicates that women of her time postulated love in marriage for achieving self- recognition and self-esteem through creative technique of familiarizing unfamiliar concepts. Therefore, it introduces new thread to Austen studies by examining how Austen familiarized her readers unconsciously with modern concepts at the late 18th century in societal and cultural respects. This study recommends that further investigations be conducted in this regard.
Alhasan, A., & Omar, N. (2020). Empowerment of Love for Jane Austen’s Females: A Case of Creativity in Familiarity. Arab World English Journal for Translation & Literary Studies 4 (4) 131-150.
Alkubaisi, M. H. S. (2020). Jane Austen: Modern Supremacy. Revista de Stiinte Politice, (66),150-160
An, S. (2013). Schema Theory in Reading. Theory & Practice in Language Studies, 3(1), 130-134.
Aron, R. (2014). Jane Austen and the European Union on “An Accomplished Young Woman”. Journal of Research in Gender Studies, 4(1), 995-1009.
Asokkumar, V. (2014). Female Psyche and Empowerment of Jane Austen and Lakshmi’s Select Novels. International Journal of Research, 1(9), 1276-1282.
Austen, J., & Jones, V. (2003). Pride and prejudice. London: Penguin Books.
Austen, J., & Kinsley, J. (2003). Mansfield Park. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Băniceru, Cristina. (2019). Jane Austen: Glose, înțelesuri, interpretări. Coordonator Mihaela Mudure. Cluj Napoca: Casa Cărții de Știință, 2019, 247p. ISBN: 978-606-17-1175-8.. Gender Studies. 18. 187-193.
Boulukos, G. E. (2006, July). The Politics of Silence:” Mansfield Park” and the Amelioration of Slavery. Novel: A Forum on Fiction, (3), 361-383. Duke University Press.
Brownstein, R. M. (1988). Jane Austen: irony and authority. Women’s Studies: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 15(1-3), 57-70.
Caffrey, M. (1997). Jane Austen’s Women: Seeking equity through relationships and gaining individual and social empowerment (Order No. EP21237).
Chandio, R., Fatima, S., & Soomro, S. (2019). Pride and Prejudice & Doll’s House: A Comparative Feminist Discourse. Language in India, 19(8), 293-304.
Dangel Stasio, Michael J., and Kathryn Duncan (2015). “An Evolutionary Approach to Jane Austen: Prehistoric Preferences “In Pride and Prejudice”.” Studies in the Novel 39.2 (2007): 133-146.
Dole, C. M. (2007). Jane Austen and mud: Pride & Prejudice (2005), British realism, and the heritage film. Persuasions: The Jane Austen Journal On-Line, 27(2).
Evans, M. (1986). Jane Austen’s feminism. Women’s Studies International Forum, 9(4), 313-321. Pergamon.
Faris Durrani (2019). Austen: Feminist and Revolutionist – An Annotated Bibliography. Georgia Institute of Technology.
Fletcher, A., & Benveniste, M. (2013). A scientific justification for literature: Jane Austen’s free indirect style as ethical tool. Journal of Narrative Theory, 43(1), 1-18.
Fessenbecker, P. (2011). Jane Austen on Love and Pedagogical Power. Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900, 747-763.
Guna, S. P. (2015). The Theme of Love and Marriage in Jane Austen’s Novels: Pride and Prejudice and Sense and Sensibility. Language in India, 15(1), 101-117.
Hall, L. A. (2009). Grounding the Figure of the Heroine: The” other Women” in Jane Austen’s Novels, (Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest.
Hamilton, S. N. (2008). Constructing Mr. Darcy: Tradition, gender, and silent spaces in Jane Austen’s “Pride and Prejudice”, (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). University of Central Oklahoma, Edmond, Oklahoma.
He, X., & Liao, L. (2015). Women Consciousness Exploration in Jane Austen and Her Works. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 3(6), 293-297.
Hynes, L. (2017, Jul 15). Why Jane Austen’s view of marriage was in its way quite modern, a contract between equals.
Kearney, J. A. (1990). Jane Austen and the Reason-Feeling Debate. Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory, (75), 107-122.
Kestner, J. A. (1994). Jane Austen: Revolutionizing Masculinities. Persuasions, 16, 147-60.
Kruger, D. J., Fisher, M. L., Strout, S. L., Lewis, S., & Wehbe, M. (2014). Pride and Prejudice or Family and Flirtation? Jane Austen’s Depiction of Women’s Mating Strategies. Evolutionary Studies in Philosophy and Literature, 38(1), A114-A128.
Knox-Shaw, P. (2004). Jane Austen and the enlightenment. Cambridge University Press.
Lanski, Marghanita (1969). Jane Austen and Her World. London. Thames and Hudson. Print.
Luxemburg, R. (1992). Die russische Revolution. In O. K. Flechtheim (ed.), Politische Schriften (Vol. 3, pp. 106-141). Frankfurt: Europa Verlag Wien.
Marek, M. (2018). Some Thoughts on Michael Chwe’s, Jane Austen, Applied Game
Theorist”. Decyzje, (30), 63-74.
Marzec, J. C. B. (2014). Reading Relationships in Jane Austen’s Mansfield Park and Pride and Prejudice, (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada.
Marrero, L. D. J. (2013). Courtship and marriage in the work of Jane Austen.
Massiha, L., & Omar, N. (2013). James Joyce’s Father Foreclosure: The Symbolic Order of Language and Social Existence. Editorial Board, 203.
McElligott, E. Jane Austen: Shaping the Standard of Women’s Education. MJUR Midwest Journal of Undergraduate Research, 79-98.
Meng, Q., & Omar, N. (2012). Resistance Against and Collusion with Colonialism: Eileen Chang’s Writing and Translation of “Steamed Osmanthus Flower Ah Xiao’s Unhappy Autumn”. Editorial Board, 563.
Mikhalusieva, V. A. (2011). Jane Austen Life and Creativity.
Moe, M. (2016). Charlotte and Elizabeth: Multiple Modernities in Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice. ELH, 83(4), 1075-1103.
Михайлусева, В. А. (2011). Jane Austen. Life and Creativity.
Mondadori Simionato, Deborah. (2018). The Real Jane Austen: Austen’s Shifting Image. Cadernos do IL. 220.
Nandana, N. G. (2012). Emphasis on Education in Jane Austen’s Novels. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 2, 1-3.
Patil, Y. (2014). The Chemistry of Love. International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, 5(4), 1317-1319.
Radu, M. C. (2013).The Female Character in Jane Austen’s Novel and in their Screenings.
Samuelian, K. F. (2009). Managing Propriety for the Regency: Jane Austen Reads the Book. Studies in Romanticism, 48(2), 279-297.
Shukurova Nigina Oripovna, Ochilova Mekhriniso Razzokovna, Kadirova Zaynab Bakoyevna, Raupova Nigora Djalalovna (2020). Artistic Embodiment of the Concept of “Pride” in Jane Austen’s Novels. Journal of Critical Reviews, 7 (18), 850-853.
Smith, G. (1890). Life of Jane Austen (Vol. 26). London: Walter Scott.
Smith, P. (1994). Mansfield Park and the world stage. Cambridge Quarterly, 23(3), 203-229.
Sundari Guna, (2015) “The theme of love and marriage in Jane Austen novel Pride and Prejudice”. www.languageinindia.com. ISSN 1930-2940, Vol. 15:1.
Swirsky, J. M., & Angelone, D. J. (2016). Equality, empowerment, and choice: what does feminism mean to contemporary women? Journal of Gender Studies, 25(4), 445-460.
Shultz, J., (2018). Feminism and Familiarity: Emily Brontë’s Wuthering Heights.
Tauchert, A. (2003). Mary Wollstonecraft and Jane Austen: ‘Rape and’ Love’ as (Feminist) Social Realism and Romance. Women: A Cultural Review, 14(2), 144-158.
Tauchert, A. (2005). Romancing Jane Austen: narrative, realism, and the possibility of a happy ending. Springer.
Trilling, L. (1957). Emma and the legend of Jane Austen. Beyond Culture: Essays on Literature and Learning, 31-55.
Toner, A. (2020). Jane Austen’s Style: Narrative Economy and the Novel’s Growth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Webber, M. (2017, Jul 18). Why Jane Austen is for all readers, not just women: The perception of Jane Austen as a “women’s writer” is drawn from recent rom-com adaptations of her work, but her books should be enjoyed by everyone, say two literary academics. ABC Premium News.
Worsley, L. (2017). Jane Austen at Home: A Biography. St. Martin’s Press. Rubin, M. (1988, Feb 21). Jane Austen as a woman of the world Jane Austen her life by
Park Honan.
Scheuermann, M. (2009). Reading Jane Austen. Springer.
Sha’bäni, M., Harehdasht, H. A., & Naseri, F. (2019). A Comparative Study of Plato’s and Jane Austen’s Concept of Love in Pride and Prejudice. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 8(3), 37-45.
Sultana, K. Z. S. (2012). Feminism in Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice. Journal of Social Sciences, 1(2), 523-536.
Sunalini, D., & Kumari, V. N. (2017). Woman Perspective in Jane Austen’s Pride and
Prejudice. International Peer-Reviewed Open Access Journal, (1).
Assia Alhasan is an English Language Instructor at the Institute of Languages in University of
Tabuk, Saudi Arabia. She is doing her PhD in English Literature at the Faculty of Modern
Languages and Communication in University Putra Malaysia (UPM). Her main interests focus on
feminism and gender studies. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1373-7242
Dr. Noritah Omar is an Associate Professor of Literature and Gender Studies at the Dept. of
English at the Faculty of Modern Languages and Communication in University Putra Malaysia.
She is the Deputy Director of Putra International Centre. Her Main interests are postcolonial theory
and literature, and gender studies.
Copyright © 2023 AWEJ-tls.org. All rights reserved.