Appraisal Outline.docx
- 文档编号:6676022
- 上传时间:2023-01-08
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:32
- 大小:135.83KB
Appraisal Outline.docx
《Appraisal Outline.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《Appraisal Outline.docx(32页珍藏版)》请在冰豆网上搜索。
AppraisalOutline
Anintroductorytourthroughappraisaltheory
[Warning:
IfyouarereadingthesenotesintheMicrosoftWordversion(ratherthanontheWeb)andyouarereadingthiswarning,thismeansyouhavesetyourdisplayoptionstoshowhiddentext.ThiswillmeanthatcertainextraneousitemstodowithformattingandthedisplayofthenotesonWebwillshowup–forexample,"SplitIt"and"Divclass="MyQuote".Togetridofthese,youwillneedtoturnoff"Hiddentextdisplay".YoudothisbygoingtotheToolsmenuandthentheOptionssub-menu.Oncethere,youwillbeprovidedwithanumberofsettingyoucanchange.Youwillseeanoption,"HiddenText"whichshouldbeintheNon-printingcharacterssection.Untickthisboxandtheextraneousitemsshoulddisappear.Sowillthiswarning]
Introduction
Appraisaltheoryisconcernedisconcernedwiththelinguisticresourcesforbywhichatexts/speakerscometoexpress,negotiateandnaturaliseparticularinter-subjectiveandultimatelyideologicalpositions.Withinthisbroadscope,thetheoryisconcernedmoreparticularlywiththelanguageofevaluation,attitudeandemotion,andwithasetofresourceswhichexplicitlypositionatext’sproposalsandpropositionsinterpersonally.Thatis,itisconcernedwiththosemeaningswhichvarythetermsofthespeaker’sengagementwiththeirutterances,whichvarywhatisatstakeinterpersonallybothinindividualutterancesandasthetextsunfoldscumulatively.
Thepaperisintendedtoprovideanoverviewofappraisaltheorybywayofanintroduction.Itthereforeomitssomeofthedetailandsomeofthemoreproblematicareasoftheanalysis.Aswell,itexcludesanyextendedexemplificationofappraisaltheoryinactioninauthentictextanalysis.Moredetailcanbeobtainedontheappraisalwebsite(inthe"IntroductoryCourseinAppraisalAnalysis"andin,forexample,Iedema,Feez,andWhite1994orWhite1998(availableasane-mailattachmentfromPeterWhiteatp.r.white@bham.ac.uk).
SomeofthekeyreferncesinAppraisalinclude(inchronologicalorder):
Iedemaetal.1994,Martin1995a,Martin1995b,ChristieandMartin1997,Martin1997,Coffin1997,EgginsandSlade1997(especiallychapter4),White1998,Martin2000,Coffin2000,White2000,Körner2001,RotheryandStenglininpress,andaspecialeditionofthejournalTexttoappearin2002.
ThefollowingsetofnotesreliesprimarilyuponIedemaetal.1994,ChristieandMartin1997,Martin2000,White1998andWhitetoappearfromwhichmostofthematerialistaken.
Itmustbenotedthatappraisaltheoryisverymuchanon-goingresearchproject–manyproblemsarestilltobesolvedandmanylexicogrammaticalandsemanticissueshaveyettobeaddressed.Therearenumerousregistersanddiscoursedomainstowhichthetheoryhasnotyetbeenapplied.(Pastexperienceindicatesthatanalysesofnewdiscoursedomainstypicallyleadtosignificantextensionstoandelaborationsoftheappraisalframeworksinceeachdomainwilltypicallyoperatewithatleastsomeuniquesemanticfeatures.)Thecommunityofresearchersusingthetheoryinsomeway,however,continuestogrowandthereforeweanticipatecontinuingbreakthroughsinthemappingofthissemanticdomain.
Appraisaltheorydividesevaluativeresourcesintothreebroadsemanticdomains:
Splitit
SubtypesofAppraisal
Attitude
Valuesbywhichspeakerspassjudgementsandassociateemotional/affectualresponseswithparticipantsandprocesses(seeunderlineditems)
Well,I'vebeenlisteningtothetwoguyswhoareheroes[valuejudgement]andIadmire[affect]themboth.
PopGroupRepublica–super-schlockstinkersonlyaPepsiexecutivecouldeverlove
Engagement
Resourcesforpositioningthespeaker’s/author’svoicewithrespecttothevariouspropositionsandproposalsconveyedbyatext;meaningsbywhichspeakerseitheracknowledgeorignorethediversityofview-pointsputatriskbytheirutterancesandnegotiateaninterpersonalspacefortheirownpositionswithinthatdiversity.
Forexample:
∙modalsofprobability-perhaps,itmay…,Ithink…,surely
∙realityphase-itseems,
∙attribution(hearsay/projection)-hisalleged…,informedsourcesreport…,scientistshavefoundevidencesuggestingthat,
∙proclamation-Infact,Iamcompelledtoconclude…,Itistrue,wedohaveasmallblackandwhitecat
∙expectation-predictably,ofcourse,
∙counter-expectation-amazingly
etc
Graduation
Valuesbywhich
(1)speakersgraduate(raiseorlower)theinterpersonalimpact,forceorvolumeoftheirutterances,and
(2)bywhichtheygraduate(blurorsharpen)thefocusoftheirsemanticcategorisations.
1.(force)slightly,somewhat,very,completely
2.(focus)Iwasfeelingkind’vwoozy,theyeffectivelysignedhisdeathwarrant;atruefriend,purefolly
Forexample
[ABCrediointerview]
MITCHELL:
Thereisanargument,though,isthere[attribution],thebankshavebeenabit[graduation:
force]greedy[attitude]Imean,theprofitsarehighandgoodonthem[attitude],they'reentitledtohavehighprofits,butatthesametimethefeesareborderingon[graduation:
focus]theunreasonable[attitude]now.
PRIMEMINISTERMrHoward:
Well,there'salotof[graduation:
force]anger[attitude:
affect]aboutmany[engagement:
force]ofthefeesandthisisreallywhy,Isayagain,[engagement:
proclamation]themorecompetitionwecanhavethebetter[attitude].Andthere'snodoubtthat[engagement:
probability]homeloaninterestrates,inparticular,arelowernowbecauseofcompetition.
Splitit
TheoriginsofappraisaltheoryandtheSFLmodelofTenor
Appraisaltheoryis,ofcourse,locatedwithintheframeworkofSystemicFunctionalLinguistics.Theprimaryimpetusforitsdevelopmenthascomefromworkconductedinthe80sand90sfortheWriteItRightprojectoftheNSWDisadvantagedSchoolsProgram.UnderWriteItRight,researchersexploredtheliteracyrequirementsofthediscoursesofscience,technology,themedia,history,Englishliteraturestudies,geographyandthevisualarts.Muchofwhatispresentedherecomesdirectlyfromthatresearch(seeforexampleIedema,Feez,andWhite1994,andChristieandMartin1997,RotheryandSenglininpress).
Predictably,issuestodowiththesemanticsoftheinterpersonalprovedtobecentralthevariousWriteItRightprojects.Forexample,acrossallthediscoursedomainsitprovednecessarytoexploreinwhatcontexts,bywhatlinguisticmeansandtowhatrhetoricalendswriterspassvaluejudgements,attributetheirpropositionstooutsidesourcesormodalisetheirutterances.
Asindicatedabove,theresearchersstartingpointwasthemodelofTenorandtheinterpersonalprovidedbytheestablishedsystemicliterature.Thatliteratureprovidedarelativelydetailedaccountofthelexicogrammaroftheinterpersonalwhichincludes,forexample,accountsof
∙speechfunctionsandtheinformationversusgoods-&-servicesdichotomy,
∙theinterpersonalfunctionalityofSubjectandFinite,
∙polarityandmodality,andinterpersonalmetaphor
∙commentadjuncts
attitudinalepithets
Additionally,workbyPoyntoninparticular(Poynton1985,Poynton19901985,1990),hadprovidedamodeloftheinterpersonalwithrespecttosocialcontext,thataspectofcontextofsituationwhichistermedTenor,andwhichisconcernedwiththeconstitutionofsocialrolesandrelationshipsandthenegotiationoftheserolesandrelationshipsbyspeakers.Underthismodel,threedimensionsareidentifiedbywhichsocialrelationshipsmaybeorganised–power/status,contactandaffect.Acertainamountofworkhasbeencarriedouttoexplorethelexicogrammaticalreflexesbywhichpower,contactandaffectarerealised.Thustheprinciplesofreciprocity,proliferationandcontractionhavebeenidentifiedbywhich,
∙equalaccesstogrammaticalresourcesreflectsequalpower/status(reciprocity)
∙thegreaterthedegreeofsocialinteraction/contactbetweeninteractants,thegreaterthearrayoflinguisticchoicesavailable(proliferation)
∙thegreaterthedegreeofsocialinteraction/contactbetweeninteractantsthemorelikelythatreduced,shortenedandellipticalexpressionformswillbetakenup(contraction)
Similarly,variouscorrelationsbetweenchoicesfromtheinterpersonallexicogrammarandtheseTenorvariableshavebeenobserved.Thusaconsistentpreferenceforhighvaluesofmodalsofobligation(youmust/should,it’snecessarythatetc)andforhighvaluesofprobability(definitely,I’mcertainthatetc)arelinkedwiththemorepowerfulspeakerinanunequalstatusrelationship.Incontrast,apreferenceformodalvaluesofinclination(I’mkeen,I’mwillingetc)andforlowvaluesofprobability(perhaps,may,Iguess…)arelinkedwiththelesspowerfulspeakerinanunequalstatusrelationship.Likewise,theuseofreducedexpressionforms,colloquiallexisandadiversityofformsofpersonaladdressareassociatedwithcontextsofhigherinvolvement/contactbetweeninteractants.Heightenedaffectiveinvolvement,similarly,hasitsownsetofindicators–thepresenceofexclamation,repetition,intensificationandattitudinallexis,andsoon.(SeeMartin1992:
523-535)
Whiletheseinsightsareofobviousrelevancetokeyquestionswithintheinterpersonalsemantics,theyneverthelesswerenotformulatedtoanswerthetypesofnewquestionsarisingfromtheRightitWriteresearch.Aneedsoonemergedfornewlinguisticaccountswithwhichcould,forexample,
∙explaincertainclearpatternsbywhichso-called‘objective’textswithinthemediaandhistoryfavouredcertainvaluesofattitudewhiledisfavouringorexcludingothers
∙explainsimilarcorrelationsbetweencertaingroupsoftextsandparticularvalueso
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- Appraisal Outline