This chapter continues investigation into register-idiosyncratic features of evaluation in parliamentary debate (Miller 2007; Miller and Johnson, 2009; 2013), reporting findings regarding the evaluative phraseologies, or “function bundles” (Halliday 1985) it is * time to/for/that in a corpus of US congressional speech on the Iraq war. Quantitative data are tested for saliency against some large general corpora of English and other smaller UK and US political corpora. Qualitative analysis focuses on the enactment of APPRAISAL SYSTEMS (Martin and White 2005). Methodology involves “shunting” (Halliday 2002 [1961]: 45), not just between corpora, but from clause, or concordance line, to co-text, and also con- and inter-text, using the corpus as a kind of ‘echo-chamber’ (Thompson and Hunston, 2006: 13) to engage with “[…] the discourse background against which linguistic choices […] can be better understood” (Thompson 2008: 399; cf. Thompson 2001; Miller 2006; Coffin and O’Halloran 2006; Miller and Johnson 2009; Bednarek 2008). It also involves a focus on the “coupling” (Martin 2000: 163-164) of ideational meaning and appraisal, posited as inviting/affording attitude (Martin and White 2005: 62 ff.; Miller and Johnson, 2013).The chapter examines how appraisers’ choices are affected by party/ gender, recognising that choice may transcend register boundaries due to both the ‘repertoire’ of the individual and his/her ideologically saturated ‘reservoir’ of culturally specific ways of meaning (Martin 2010: 23). Cited References Bednarek, Monica. 2008. Emotion Talk across Corpora. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Coffin, Caroline and O’Halloran, Keiran. 2006. “The role of appraisal and corpora in detecting covert evaluation”. Functions of Language 13(1): 77–110. Halliday, Michael A.K.. 1985. “Dimensions of Discourse Analysis: Grammar.” In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Vol. 2: Dimensions of Discourse, London: Academic Press, 29-56; also in On Grammar, Vol. 1 in The collected works of M. A. K. Halliday, Jonathan J. Webster (ed), 261-286. London & NY: Continuum. Halliday, Michael A.K.. 2002 [1961]. “Categories of the Theory of Grammar.” In On Grammar, Vol. 1 in The collected works of M. A. K. Halliday, Jonathan J. Webster (ed), 37-94. London: Continuum. Martin, James R.. 2000. “Beyond exchange: APPRAISAL systems in English.” In Evaluation in Text, Susan Hunston and Geoff Thompson (eds), 142-175. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Martin, James R.. 2010. “Semantic Variation – Modelling Realisation, Instantiation and Individuation in Social Semiosis.” In New Discourse on Language Functional Perspectives on Multimodality, Identity, and Affiliation, Monica Bednarek and James R. Martin (eds), 1-34. London and New York: Continuum. Martin, James R. and White, Peter R. R.. 2005. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Miller, Donna R.. 2006. “From concordance to text: appraising ‘giving’ in Alma Mater donation requests”. In System and Corpus: Exploring Connections, Geoff Thompson and Susan Hunston (eds), 248 – 268. London: Equinox. Miller, Donna R.. 2007. “Towards a Typology of Evaluation in Parliamentary debate: From theory to Practice – and back again.” In (Re)volutions in Evaluation, Marina Dossena and Andreas Jucker (eds), Textus XX 1: 159-180. Miller, Donna R. and Johnson, Jane Helen. 2009. “Strict vs. Nurturant Parents? A Corpus-Assisted Study of Congressional Positioning on the War in Iraq.” In Corpus Assisted Discourse Studies on the Iraq Conflict: Wording the War, John Morley and Paul Bayley (eds), 34 – 73. London: Routledge. Miller, Donna R. and Johnson, Jane Helen. 2013. “'Register-idiosyncratic' evaluative choice in congressional debate: a corpus-assisted comparative study.” In Systemic Functional Linguistics. Exploring Choice, Lise Fontaine, Tom Bartlett and Gerald O’Grady (eds), 432-453. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Thompson, Geoff. 2001. “Corpus, comparison, culture: doing the same things differently in different languages.” In The Use of Small Corpora in the Teaching of Language, Ghadessy, Mohsen, Henry, Alex and Roseberry, Robert L. (eds), 311–334. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Thompson, Geoff. 2008. “Review of Monika Bednarek, Emotion Talk across Corpora”. In Linguistics and the Human Sciences, 3(3): 399-404. Thompson, Geoff and Hunston, Susan (eds). 2006. System and Corpus: Exploring Connections. London: Equinox.

Evaluative phraseological choice and speaker party/gender. A corpus-assisted comparative study of register-idiosyncratic meaning in Congressional debate

MILLER, DONNA ROSE;JOHNSON, JANE HELEN
2014

Abstract

This chapter continues investigation into register-idiosyncratic features of evaluation in parliamentary debate (Miller 2007; Miller and Johnson, 2009; 2013), reporting findings regarding the evaluative phraseologies, or “function bundles” (Halliday 1985) it is * time to/for/that in a corpus of US congressional speech on the Iraq war. Quantitative data are tested for saliency against some large general corpora of English and other smaller UK and US political corpora. Qualitative analysis focuses on the enactment of APPRAISAL SYSTEMS (Martin and White 2005). Methodology involves “shunting” (Halliday 2002 [1961]: 45), not just between corpora, but from clause, or concordance line, to co-text, and also con- and inter-text, using the corpus as a kind of ‘echo-chamber’ (Thompson and Hunston, 2006: 13) to engage with “[…] the discourse background against which linguistic choices […] can be better understood” (Thompson 2008: 399; cf. Thompson 2001; Miller 2006; Coffin and O’Halloran 2006; Miller and Johnson 2009; Bednarek 2008). It also involves a focus on the “coupling” (Martin 2000: 163-164) of ideational meaning and appraisal, posited as inviting/affording attitude (Martin and White 2005: 62 ff.; Miller and Johnson, 2013).The chapter examines how appraisers’ choices are affected by party/ gender, recognising that choice may transcend register boundaries due to both the ‘repertoire’ of the individual and his/her ideologically saturated ‘reservoir’ of culturally specific ways of meaning (Martin 2010: 23). Cited References Bednarek, Monica. 2008. Emotion Talk across Corpora. Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Coffin, Caroline and O’Halloran, Keiran. 2006. “The role of appraisal and corpora in detecting covert evaluation”. Functions of Language 13(1): 77–110. Halliday, Michael A.K.. 1985. “Dimensions of Discourse Analysis: Grammar.” In The Handbook of Discourse Analysis, Vol. 2: Dimensions of Discourse, London: Academic Press, 29-56; also in On Grammar, Vol. 1 in The collected works of M. A. K. Halliday, Jonathan J. Webster (ed), 261-286. London & NY: Continuum. Halliday, Michael A.K.. 2002 [1961]. “Categories of the Theory of Grammar.” In On Grammar, Vol. 1 in The collected works of M. A. K. Halliday, Jonathan J. Webster (ed), 37-94. London: Continuum. Martin, James R.. 2000. “Beyond exchange: APPRAISAL systems in English.” In Evaluation in Text, Susan Hunston and Geoff Thompson (eds), 142-175. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Martin, James R.. 2010. “Semantic Variation – Modelling Realisation, Instantiation and Individuation in Social Semiosis.” In New Discourse on Language Functional Perspectives on Multimodality, Identity, and Affiliation, Monica Bednarek and James R. Martin (eds), 1-34. London and New York: Continuum. Martin, James R. and White, Peter R. R.. 2005. The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan. Miller, Donna R.. 2006. “From concordance to text: appraising ‘giving’ in Alma Mater donation requests”. In System and Corpus: Exploring Connections, Geoff Thompson and Susan Hunston (eds), 248 – 268. London: Equinox. Miller, Donna R.. 2007. “Towards a Typology of Evaluation in Parliamentary debate: From theory to Practice – and back again.” In (Re)volutions in Evaluation, Marina Dossena and Andreas Jucker (eds), Textus XX 1: 159-180. Miller, Donna R. and Johnson, Jane Helen. 2009. “Strict vs. Nurturant Parents? A Corpus-Assisted Study of Congressional Positioning on the War in Iraq.” In Corpus Assisted Discourse Studies on the Iraq Conflict: Wording the War, John Morley and Paul Bayley (eds), 34 – 73. London: Routledge. Miller, Donna R. and Johnson, Jane Helen. 2013. “'Register-idiosyncratic' evaluative choice in congressional debate: a corpus-assisted comparative study.” In Systemic Functional Linguistics. Exploring Choice, Lise Fontaine, Tom Bartlett and Gerald O’Grady (eds), 432-453. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Thompson, Geoff. 2001. “Corpus, comparison, culture: doing the same things differently in different languages.” In The Use of Small Corpora in the Teaching of Language, Ghadessy, Mohsen, Henry, Alex and Roseberry, Robert L. (eds), 311–334. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Thompson, Geoff. 2008. “Review of Monika Bednarek, Emotion Talk across Corpora”. In Linguistics and the Human Sciences, 3(3): 399-404. Thompson, Geoff and Hunston, Susan (eds). 2006. System and Corpus: Exploring Connections. London: Equinox.
Evaluation in Context
345
366
MILLER DONNA ROSE; JOHNSON JANE HELEN
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/234880
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact