| Evaluation is the speaker's or writer's attitude or stance towards entities or propositions. Pioneers in the analysis of evaluative functions of language are Greenbaum (1969) and Labov (1972, 1984). Others, including Lyons (1977), Winter (1979, 1982, 1994), Sinclair (1981), Hoey (1983), Van Dijk (1987, 1988), Biber at al (1999), Hunston & Thompson (2000) and Conrad & Biber (2001), have adopted various ways to the study of evaluation. Similar terms to explore evaluation encoded in discourse are employed by other linguists such as evidentiality (Chafe & Nichols, 1986), affect intensifiers (Ochs & Schiefflen, 1989), affect (Besnier, 1993), modality (Bybee & Fleischman, 1995), attitude (Halliday, 1985, 1994, 2004) and appraisal (Martin, 2000). In this dissertation evaluation is used as the cover term for the writer's attitude.Appraisal Theory (James Martin, 2000), a framework for analyzing evaluation in discourse, extends interpersonal metafunction by shifting the focus of study from grammar to lexis in the continuum. It naturalizes inter-subjective ideological positions, establishes a more systematic pattern for interpersonal meanings, and makes a detailed study of attitude, engagement and appreciation. Lexical resources are illustrated to perform interpersonal metafunction. Since this theory relies heavily on explicit lexical items to construe evaluation, evaluation triggered by implicit tokens is thus very often neglected.Evaluation is a pervasive element in any discourse and every utterance has value judgment. It is acknowledged that the writer can incorporate his attitude in any part of writing through the manipulation of linguistic devices. The sole dependence on lexical items for the construal of evaluation is not reliable on some occasions. Therefore Appraisal Theory has its limitation and this dissertation attempts to examine evaluation , especially implicit evaluation, realized by textual metafunction in order to provide a complete framework for the analysis of evaluation in discourse.This dissertation is situated within the framework of Systemic Functional Linguistics and argues for evaluation performed by textual metafunction. The study goes beyond the lexical approach to the research of evaluation with an intention to complement Appraisal Theory. It explores a dynamic interaction between implicit and explicit evaluation in details with integration of the role of contextual variables. This research is intended to address the following issues:a. How do cohesive devices contribute to the construction of implicit evaluation?b. What is the relationship between choice of information structure and implicit evaluation?c. How do different clausal structures constitute varied implicit evaluation?d. In what ways do sources of information influence the construction of evaluation?e. How is implicit evaluation construed dynamically and interactively as a result of contextual factors?The dissertation is composed of seven chapters and the findings of the research are summarized in the following:Cohesive devices, apart from linking different parts of clauses, perform evaluative function as well. The writer takes advantage of logico-semantic relationship of cohesive resources to integrate his attitude in discourse without resorting to value-laden lexes. Counter-expectancy, concession and reformulation enable the speaker to lay different weight on varied propositions and entities. Textual modifiers and some attitudinal cohesive adverbials are also employed to evaluate the previous or following proposition.Since what is in the position of Given is presumed to be known by readers, information structure enjoys evaluative potential. Given information is not open to negotiation by the reader and thus choice of lexis in Given tactically conveys the writer's attitude without leaving any trace of subjectivity. More information can be packed in Given through grammatical metaphor and general nouns or retrospective labels.Clausal structure enables the writer to offer different pictures of the same event with the same lexical items. Four clausal structures: evaluative that-structure, marked clause structure, embedded structure and negative structure, can contribute to different evaluation. It is the writer who gives the readers the cue that certain textual structures imply evaluation.Apart from exploitation of explicit lexical items as stance markers, the writer can show his attitude by clarifying what propositions come from him (averral) and what is from others (attribution). If attribution is in line with the writer's view, it presupposes the positive evaluation of the attributed. When attribution differs from what is averred in context, negative evaluation is realized. In addition, the writer can choose varied verbs of attribution to implicate his attitude.Context of situation determines evaluative meanings of lexical items in immediate environment. It can not be taken for granted that the presence of one linguistic form or another indicates the stance on the part of the writer. Context of culture decides value system, which is crucial to the writer's attitude towards entities and propositions. The readers from different backgrounds may interpret varied evaluation from the same discourse.This dissertation argues that interplay between interpersonal and textual metafunction coarticulates evaluation encoded in the discourse. Evaluative meanings of discourse result from accumulation, reinforcement and resonation of lexes and grammar. Now that implicit evaluation is more likely to manipulate readers, importance should be given to its construction and interpretation. Therefore, a comprehensive framework, involving cohesive devices, information structure, clausal structure, sources of information and contextual variables, is developed for the analysis of implicit evaluation throughout the dissertation. The data for analysis are chiefly collected from The Washington Post and British National Corpus. This research is qualitative in nature despite the fact that quite a number of samples are cited in the dissertation.
|
PDF Full Text Request