Scarica Modality and Engagement in Textual Analysis: A Linguistic Perspective e più Appunti in PDF di Linguistica Inglese solo su Docsity!
LEXICAL METAPHOR
Metalanguage (language that explains language) typical metaphorical more congruent less congruent literal Metaphor: the usage of a certain image to convey another image that has similar elements or characteristics. Example My lawyer is a shark Identifying process → my lawyer = a shark Lexical metaphors exploit simultaneous similarity and difference with the corresponding literal expression. The metaphorical expression has some elements of similarity with the literal expression, but also some elements of difference. It is thanks to this ‘clash’ that we actually perceive its ‘metaphoricity’. Example My lawyer is a shark element of similarity → aggressive, ruthless element of difference → lawyer = human shark = animal Metaphors are a question of word choice: to express a meaning we have a choice between a more congruent and a more metaphorical wording. If we choose one instead of the other the effect is different. Example Compare → My lawyer is a shark / My lawyer is ruthless My lawyer is ruthless → it is more explicit, we don’t have a second way to read it. Connect metaphor and culture : a very old lexical metaphor in the English language Etymology fall (v.), to fall in love is attested from 1520s. Meaning fall - pass suddenly and passively into a state of body and mind; fall into a trap; she fell ill; They fell out of favor; fall in love; fall asleep; fall prey to an imposter; fall into a strange way of thinking; she fell to pieces after she lost her job. “To fall in love” is a metaphor, and it has a positive connotation, instead of the other ones ( fall in pieces …) Some common lexical metaphors in English ● He has no direction in life ● We are at the crossroads ● She will certainly go places ● Don’t let anyone stand in your way → LIFE IS A JOURNEY ● I can’t digest the entire book ● Those ideas are half-baked ● That’s food for thought ● Let me stew over that one → IDEAS ARE FOOD ‘Politics is conflict’ In politics, metaphors are used because they are powerful vehicles of persuasion. A study by Jonathan Charteris-Black has focused on a corpus of postwar manifestos of the two major political parties in the UK. He found that it is common for both parties to include the use of terms such as ‘fight’, ‘battle’, ‘protect’, ‘threat’ to illustrate policies.
Example We will defend the fundamental rights of parents (Conservative) We will defend the agricultural environment (Labour) Politicians and Rhetoric. The Persuasive power of metaphor Jonathan Charteris-Black writes that metaphors are powerful vehicles of persuasion. Used as a bridge between the familiar and the literal, they transfer meaning from what is easily understood to more complex concepts that are harder to grasp. By drawing on deeply rooted cultural schemata politicians are able to represent their beliefs and their policies as heroic tasks and themselves as epic heroes. Likewise, they are able to demonize their enemies and depict opposing policies as villainous. Lexical metaphors are also used in newspapers to describe in different ways the same event. Example: March 2017, attack in London
- Although it was a “lone wolf” assault of the sort seen several times during the past year in France and Germany, the British-born killer may have had helpers. [ The Economist ] → lone wolf = unpredictable, solitary, cruel. Someone who act alone, they are outside a pack, they are unpredictable, cruel.
- The Trail of Terror Across Westminster Bridge. [ The New York Times ] → trail = visible, durable in time.
- Mr. Speaker, yesterday an act of terrorism tried to silence our democracy. But today we meet as normal [...] to deliver a simple message: we are not afraid, and our resolve will never waver in the face of terrorism. [PM Theresa May to Parliament] → silence our democracy → waver Violent crime. Metaphors and Covid- “We are at war” and “Join forces to fight” → disease is an enemy. → metaphors to describe illnesses in general (ex. cancer or incurable diseases). Concepts like diseases, food, arguments, love are metaphorically structured in our mind as a fight.
The processes - team work
- I first laid all the planks or boards upon it [...], I got three of the seamen’s chests, which I had broken open, and emptied, and lowered them down upon my raft. → Robinson Crusoe by Daniel Defoe.
- In nine cases out of ten, a woman had better show more affection than she feels. [...] he began to feel the danger of paying Elizabeth too much attention. [...] Consider Mr Collins’ respectability, and Charlotte’s prudent, steady character [...] she may well feel something like regard and esteem for our cousin. → Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen.
- A continuous rise in complexity towards Cambrian life was one of Darwin’s predictions. → A science-book.
TRANSITIVITY: PARTICIPANTS
Participants are not meaningless grammatical labels that you have to memorize. On the contrary, as with Processes, the choice of participants is meaningful because Participants are realizations of social entities. Metalanguage: an overview of participants Process Meaning Participants Material Doing Actor Goal Mental Sensing Senser Phenomenon Relational
- Identifying
- Attributive
1. X = Y
- X carries attribute Y
- Identified = Identifier
- Carries and Attribute Verbal Saying Sayer Recipient Target Verbiage Behavioural Behaving Behaver Existential Existing Existent The cline of dynamism or a cline of power DYNAMIC Actor + animate Goal John took Harry to London Actor + inanimate Goal John took the books with him. Sayer + Receiver John told Harry... Sayer + Target John praised the system Sayer John talked Phenomenon + Senser John/the picture attracted her
Senser John recognised the house Mary was attracted by it/him Actor NO Goal John went away Behaver John woke up Carrier John was sleepy Goal/Target... John took Harry with him Circumstance... John was with Harry PASSIVE Note. Being an Actor is not sufficient to define the degree of dynamism, and the social role of a participant. Focusing attention on participants: from theory to practice ● Context ● Two different press accounts of an event of civil disorder in May 2004 ● In the Gaza strip
- Israeli attack kills 10 Palestinians in Gaza Israeli forces have killed at least ten Palestinians, most of them children, after firing on a crowd of demonstrators in Gaza strip today. The author of article (1) makes use of material processes. The Israeli army has the -er (active) role, while the Palestinians take on the –ed (passive) role. Israeli forces are construed as being powerful and aggressive, acting against weak and passive Palestinian victims
- Rafah incident Today’s incident in Rafah is a very grave incident and the Israeli Foreing Office expresses deep sorrow over the loss of civilian lives. The author of article (2) uses two types of Process: a relational-attributive and a verbal. The text does not construct a narrative, it provides a description. The –er role of the verbal Process is the Israeli Foreign Office. Palestinians do not feature in either –er or –ed roles. **The cline of dynamism
- dynamic = -er role** Actor + animate Goal Israeli attack kills ten palestinians in Gaza Israeli forces have killes Actor + inanimate Goal Sayer + Recipient [= Receiver] Sayer + Target Sayer The Israeli Foreign Office expresses deep sorrow
These intermediate degrees, between the positive and negative poles, are known collectively as modality. A simple starting definition of modality is that it is the space between ‘yes’ and ‘no’.
- She teaches Latin. M S O P D A A C L E She might teach Latin. She usually teaches Latin. She ought to teach Latin. She’ll teach Latin if you want. She can teach Latin if she wants. She can teach Latin well. perhaps yes, perhaps no sometimes yes, sometimes no at present no, but ideally in the future yes at present no, but in the future yes if you want at present no, but in the future yes if she wants in principle yes, at present maybe yes or no
- She doesn’t teach Latin. Metalanguage - Modality: definition The grammatical system that is used to make assessment from the points of view of probability, usuality, temporality, typicality, willingness, inclination, capacity and obligation. Grammatical resources to express modality ● Modal adjunct : it establishes the extent to which the speaker views the action or state as (im)probable. These Adjuncts fall into two main groups. Comment Adjuncts typically comment on the clause as a whole rather than give circumstantial information about the event, and they are often separated off from the rest of the clause by commas. Mood Adjuncts are closely related to the Finite: they express meanings associated with tense, polarity and modality. ● Modal operators : also called ‘modal connective’, it is a logical connective. ● Multi-word expressions : MWEs are expressions which are made up of at least two words and which can be syntactically and/or semantically idiosyncratic in nature. Moreover, they act as a single unit at some level of linguistic analysis. Modality types ● Modalization (Epistemic modality) degrees of possibility or probability and usuality. Epistemic modal operators (K-operators) reflect the level of knowledge, ignorance and belief in the possible world. If the commodity being exchanged is information, we can refer to the utterance as a proposition. In such cases, the modality relates to how valid the information is being presented as in terms of probability (how likely it is to be true) or usuality (how frequently it is true). Probability scale: possible / probable / certain; usuality scale: sometimes / often / always. ● Modulation (Deontic modality) degrees of obligation and inclination or willingness. Deontic modal operators (P-operators) influence the construction of possible worlds as proscriptive or prescriptive norms, i.e. they indicate what is prohibited, obligatory, or permitted. If the commodity is goods-&-services, we can call the utterance a proposal ; and then the modality relates to how confident the speaker can appear to be in the eventual success of the exchange. In commands, this concerns the degree of obligation (scale for the demanded goods-&-services: permissible / advisable / obligatory), while in offers it concerns the degree of willingness (scale: ability / willingness / determination). Lexical resources: modal verbs and semi-modal verbs ● Probability may, might, can, could, will, would, should, must ● Usuality may, might, can, could, will, would, should, must ● Willingness may, might, can, could, will, would, must, shall ● Obligation may, might, can, could, should, must, have to, had better, ought to, need
Note. In English, a single form may be used to express more than one type of modality. For example, both “must” and “may” have two distinct uses, which are often referred to as distinct senses: epistemic vs. deontic. Example It shall be lawful for His Majesty to appoint a Minister (hereinafter referred to as " the Minister "), whose duty it shall be to promote the education of the people of England and Wales and the progressive development of institutions devoted to that purpose, and to secure the effective execution by local authorities, under his control and direction, of the national policy for providing a varied and comprehensive educational service in every area. The Minister shall for all purposes be a corporation sole under the name of the Minister of Education, and the department of which he is in charge shall be known as the Ministry of Education. The Minister shall take the oath of allegiance and the official oath, and the Promissory Oaths Act, 1868, shall have effect as if the Minister of Education were named in the First Part of the Schedule to that Act. While shall is quite uncommon in English as a modal of obligation, in regulatory texts it is highly favoured. “Shall” → not very frequently used in English. What kind of modality does it embody? It is deontic modality because it’s a formal text. We use it if someone is willing to do something. Modality may also be signalled in Mood by a Mood Adjunct : in fact, this is the most normal way of expressing usuality. Probability in particular can be signalled by a combination of modal operator and Mood Adjunct. With modulation , there is the same choice between modal operators (e.g. ‘will’, ‘must’) and Mood Adjuncts (e.g. ‘necessarily’, ‘willingly’). Lexical resources: modal adjuncts Probability probably, possibly, certainly, definitely, no way, hardly, maybe, perhaps Usuality generally, usually, often, sometimes, occasionally, seldom, rarely, never Willingness willingly, readily Obligation definitely, absolutely Lexical resources: mood adjuncts Temporality yet, still, once, eventually, soon
well done everybody, because it sounds a simple thing to do. When we actually got down to it, it wasn't quite as simple was it, and I think every one of you were personalising it really well, and making an excellent start. [ spoken register ] For Bolivia and its miners it means the loss of hard fought for democratic rights and freedoms and the emergence of a new era of lawlessness, inequality and poverty. While the rest of the Bolivian economy slumps and the poor actually get poorer, the coca-barons are doing well. [ written register - rarer ]
- spoken register; “actually” → exceeding. Can be substituted with “really” (counterexpectancy)
- written register: “actually” → exceeding (synonym of “really”). You can substitute it with “in fact”, “in actual fact” or “even”. Utterly → it’s a modifier Nouns and verbs modified by “utterly” ● ridiculous → utterly ridiculous ● miserable → utterly miserable ● exhaust ● disgraceful ● ruthless ● fail → failed utterly ● destroy → utterly destroyed ● condemn ● unexpected ● compelling Most of them are negative, they give a negative collocation. Entirely → synonym of “utterly”, both of them give a “total”. Nouns and verbs modified by “entirely” ● new → an entirely new ● different → an entirely different ● consist ● depend → depends entirely on ● agree → i entirely agree with ● clear → is not entirely clear ● rely → rely entirely on ● devote → devoted entirely to ● free → entirely free of ● appropriate → entirely appropriate Very much positive. Modality through multi-word expressions Both modalization and modulation can be expressed not just through Modal Adjuncts and Modal Verbs but also through multi-word expressions. Modalization: “It is usual for” “It is likely that” Modulation: “It is necessary” “It is required that” “x is supposed to” “x is willing to”
Polarity and modality Value of modality Modality value concerns the extent to which a writer or speaker commits him/herself to the validity of what s/he is writing/saying. This can be high, median or low. Modalization Modulation Probability Usuality Obligation Willingness High certain always required must determined Median probable will usually supposed should keen Low possible might sometimes allowed may willing
In 2. the writer expresses his opinion with the modal adjunct “probably”; unlike the modal verb, this is not grammatically connected to the subject and provides a more objective case than 1. Modality types and orientation Modality: examples of ‘type’ and orientation combined Subjective: Subjective: Objective: Objective: explicit implicit implicit explicit Modalization: probability I think [in my opinion] Mary knows Mary’ll know Mary probably knows [in all probability] It’s likely that Mary knows [Mary is likely to] Modalization: usuality Fred’ll sit quite quiet Fred usually sits quite quiet It’s usual for Fred to sit quite quiet Modulation: obligation I want John to go John should go John’s supposed to go It’s expected that John goes Modulation: inclination Jane’ll help Jane’s keen to help Summing up Explicit forms = more than one clause; but BE CAREFUL, there had to be a projection with one clause expressing speaker’s orientation and the second the proposition. Implicit forms = modal verbal operator or Modal Adjunct are in the Mood Block of one clause/proposition. Subjective explicit = Orientation is expressed projecting clause with Senser/Sayer + projecting Process Objective explicit = Orientation is expressed by an “ It clause” Subjective implicit = modality expressed by a modal verbal operator Objective implicit = modality expressed by a Modal Adjunct or expressions of modality
ENGAGEMENT
Focusing on Engagement. The meaning. ( engage someone in ) Involve someone in a conversation or discussion. Examples: They attempted to engage Anthony in conversation. We must engage them in discussions that involve their experiences, their questions and their standards. I’d be happy to engage her in a discussion about the value of advertising. [ no object ] ( engage in or be engaged in ) Participate or become involved in Examples: Each of the named individuals is a scientist who engages in research involving animals. He has been actively engaged in an open exchange on what Indonesia is and should be. The Engagement System, like Orientation of Modality, is concerned with “resources for positioning the speaker’s or the author’s voice with respect to the various propositions or proposals conveyed by the text”. Engagement questions “How many points of view - or voices - are expressed?” “Does the speaker/writer encourage dialogue, confrontation of opinions and evaluation or does he/she discourage it?” “Does he/she opens him/herself up to readers/listeners opinions or does he/she disregard them?” More on Engagement Engagement functions rhetorically to construct relations of alignment or vice versa, disalignment, between the speaker/writer and the listener/reader. Engagement is concerned with whether the author of an utterance excludes (= monoglossia ) or admits (= heteroglossia ) any external positions. Engagement refers to notions of dialogism or heteroglossia that sees verbal communication as dialogic. To speak or to write is always to reveal the influence of, or refer to, what has been said/written before and simultaneously to anticipate the responses of actual or potential listeners/readers or voices. Monogloss or Heterogloss?
- The Earth goes around the sun.
- According to scientists, the Earth goes around the sun. In Example 1, the author utters a statement without any references to external sources, this is a monoglossic proposition. In Example 2, the author refers to “scientists”, therefore, in this case we deal with heteroglossia. Heteroglossia is often used by an author to demonstrate that what he/she is saying does not belong to him/her, or to demonstrate that what he/she is saying is supported by other [reputable] people, and, thus, deserves trust/consideration. Examples:
- Do you think it is nice?
- It is a nice day, isn’t it?
- Perhaps they will be on time.
- Mr. Brown believes it is too late.
- Those boys broke in the apartment.
textual voice introduces the voice of Tickner and of Aboriginal women presenting their propositions as personal opinions (rather than facts) that can be debated. In this way he keeps the dialogue open to other possible opinions. Heteroglossic engagement in student’s history writing Engagement move Description Rhetorical effect Example Possible discourse markers Proclaim: Endorse writer references an outside source and indicates support of this source may strengthen the writer’s argument This depicts that the Babylonian women had no right to freedom of choice X proves X shows X demonstrates Proclaim: Pronounce writer inserts their own voice in the next emphasizes the point being made and rejects alternative perspectives I believe that Hammurabi’s code was fair with women The fact is… I contend that… Indeed... Ctd Engagement move Description Rhetorical effect Example Possible discourse markers Disclaim: Deny writer rejects the perspective that is projected onto the reader may be confrontational (dis-aligning) or corrective (aligning) They were not seen as equally as men [...] Men and women were not treated fully and genuinely No, did not, never Disclaim: Counter writer advances a perspective that is contrary to typical expectations often positions the reader as sharing writer’s surprise at the counter - expectational case Every single law is addressed to men … even when the laws are closely referring to female issues Yet, but, even Engagement move Description Rhetorical effect Example Possible discourse markers Entertain writer keeps alternative perspectives in play in a context where likelihood avoids alienating the reader by allowing room for multiple This can perhaps also mean that women were less literate Perhaps Possibly May
of disagreement is high voices or interpretations than men Attribute, Acknowledge writer uses a framing device to bring an external voice into the text, without displaying an over attitude towards the external voice demonstrates interaction with another voice broadening the range of perspectives on the topic A law from Hammurabi states, “if a man takes a woman to wife ... According to… X suggests X says …
Evaluation - main features To make an evaluation, we need:
- An appraiser = the thing/person that makes the evaluation
- An appraisee = the thing/person that is evaluated Evaluations can be positive or negative. All word classes can construe evaluation. Evaluations can be implicit or explicit. Affect It “is concerned with registering positive or negative feelings: do we feel happy, sad, confident or anxious, interested or bored”. It is a resource for enacting the emotional responses of participants to phenomena. Affect is in a sense the most ‘natural’ way of talking about how we feel about things: it covers the expression of our emotional responses. But we can also talk about our feelings towards things and events as if they were qualities of the thing or event itself. Types/categories: ● Dis/inclination : desire - fear ● In/security : confident - anxious ● Un/happiness : happy - sad ● Dis/satisfaction : pleased - angry Affect as quality attributed to a participant through: ● Epithet (e.g. “The happy Prince”) ● Circumstance of manner (e.g. “The Prince sang happily ”) ● Process: Behavioural (e.g. “The Prince laughed ”) Affect as a comment : ● Modal Adjunct (e.g. “ Gingerly , in he came”) Judgement Judgement is concerned with the institutionalization of feeling regarding the norms about how people should and shouldn’t behave. It concerns evaluations appraisers make regarding character and behaviour of people. The Judgement assessments may be more indirectly evoked or implied - rather than explicitly inscribed - by so-called ‘tokens’ of Judgement. Under such tokens, judgement values are triggered by superficially neutral, ideational meanings which nevertheless have the capacity in the culture to evoke judgemental responses (depending upon the reader's social/cultural/ideological position). Example: A commentator may inscribe a negative JUDGEMENT by directly accusing the government of 'incompetence' OR evoke the same value by means of a token such as "the government has not laid the foundations for long term growth". ● Social esteem normality : how un/usual someone is (broadly to do with capacity : how capable they are social behaviour) tenacity : how resolute they are ● Social sanction veracity : how truthful someone is (broadly to do with proprierty : how ethical someone is moral qualities)
Judgement and Modal types Social Esteem ● Normality & Usuality → e.g. He is usually calm ● Capacity & Ability → e.g. He can be calm ● Tenacity & Inclination → e.g. He is keen to start the course this semester Social sanction ● Ethics & Obligation → e.g. I must visit my granny at the hospital ● Veracity & Probability → e.g. This may be an honest report Expressing Judgement ● Classifiers → e.g. proper, fair ● Things → e.g. integrity, bigotry, racism, terrorism ● Processes → e.g. look after ● Circumstances → rightly, wrongly, fairly An example: affect & judgement I am disappointed [affect] and ashamed [affect] that two of our most admired and respected [affect] sportsmen could behave in such a manner. To play for your country is an honour and a privilege, not a right. Those who are chosen to represent Australia should not only be talented [JUDGEMENT] but they should be above reproach [JUDGEMENT]. Sport is supposed to teach honour, fair play, teamwork, leadership and social skills [JUDGEMENT]. It is not supposed to "create" or support greed and egos [JUDGEMENT]. Gambling is not what we want our children to be learning from their heroes [JUDGEMENT] and mentors. SOCIAL ESTEEM “venial” Positive (admire) Negative (criticize) Normality “is s/he special?” Lucky, fortunate, charmed… Normal, average, everyday… In, fashionable, avant-garde... Unfortunate, pitiful, tragic… Odd, peculiar, eccentric… Dated, draggy, retrograde... Capacity “is s/he capable?” Powerful, vigorous, robust… Insightful, clever, gifted… Balanced, together, sane... Mild, weak, wimpy… Slow, stupid, thick… Flaky, neurotic, insane... Tenacity “is s/he reliable, dependable?” Plucky, brave, heroic… Dependable… Tireless, persevering, resolute... Rash, cowardly, despondent… Unreliable, undependable… Weak, distracted, dissolute... SOCIAL ESTEEM “mortal” Positive (praise) Negative (condemn) Veracity (truth) “is s/he honest?” Truthful, honest, credible… Real, authentic, genuine… Frank, direct... Dishonest, deceitful… Glitzy, bogus, fake… Deceptive, manipulative...
