Evaluative Language sources: Partington A., 2006, Persuasion in Politics, Milano, Ed. LED Martin, J.R. & White, 2005, The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English, Palgrave Macmillan, London & NY Language which expresses the opinion, attitude and point of view of a speaker or writer is sometimes called evaluative language. Evaluation is intended, in simple terms, as the indication that something is good or bad (Hunston 2004). Not necessarily good or bad in a strictly moral sense, but also as favorable or unfavorable in an almost infinite number of wider senses: good can be intended as profitable, enjoyable, sensible and so on, bad as the opposite of all these.
Evaluation and Persuasion Evaluation is clearly the very basis of persuasion, in politics as in life. The persuader uses evaluative language to convince their audience that their own opinions are good, alternative ones are not good, that their proposals are worthy and logical (good!), those of their opponents illogical or dangerous (bad!), that they themselves are honest and trustworthy (good!) and maybe that others who disagree with them are not (bad!).
Language in Politics How many political actions or events involving the use of language can you think of? Can you think of any political actions or events which do NOT involve using language at same stage? Politics is not just conducted through language, but much of politics is language. (Fairclough 1989)
Btw a political joke (Partington 2006) George W. Bush, Tony Blair and Silvio Berlusconi were having a meeting on the Air Force One airplane when it crashes. They ascend to heaven, and God s sitting on the great white throne. God addresses George first: So, Mr. Bush, what do you believe in? Well, I believe that might is right, in the power of the dollar and, of course, I believe in you, Lord. God thinks for a second and says: Ok, I can live with that. Come and sit at my left. God then addresses Tony: Now, Mr. Blair, what do you believe in? I believe in everything my friend George believes in, only more so. God thinks for a second and says: Ok, that sounds good. Come and sit at my right. God then addresses Silvio: Well, Mr. Berlusconi, what do you believe in? I believe you re sitting in my chair.
Useful links www.bbc.co.uk One of the richest sites for political information on the web www.americanrhetoric.com Contains a number of important speeches and other documents regarding US political history www.whitehouse.gov Contains an ongoing record of current news as presented by the White House and press briefings www.number-10.gov.uk Provides a similar service for the UK government www.satirewire.com Contains a number of satirical works on current issues
Implicit or explicit Evaluation Evaluation can be expressed overtly or covertly Covert or implicit evaluation is so called because the speaker or writer provides no obvious linguistic clues, but exploits the audience s ability to recognize a good or bad thing when they see it.
Overt or explicit Evaluation It can be achieved as follows: Grammatical evaluation Textual evaluation Lexical evaluation
Comparatives Grammatical evaluation better/worse than, richer/poorer than, etc. Transitivity: who does what to whom (and how) It enables the language user to place the participants and events in a particular order, and allows him/her to express responsibility, hence evaluation Consider the differences between: John argued with Mary Mary argued with John John and Mary argued John and Mary got a divorce John divorced Mary Mary was divorced by John John got a divorce
Textual evaluation It expresses evaluation through the particular position or order of blocks of language in a text: The final paragraphs of newspaper editorials, for instance, tend to indicate favored solutions to problems proposed in the previous part of the text; If a politician presents two alternative policies to his/her audience, one of which he/she agrees with and wishes to persuade the audience to adopt, and one of which he/she does not, he/she will generally talk of the one he/she does not approve of first and the one he/she wants to promote second. This is called the straw man technique.
Lexical evaluation The most obvious signs of evaluation are contained in the lexis, that is, the words a speaker or writer uses. This is true both for Grammar (or function) words Determiners (the, a, some ) Linkers (and, because, since ) Prepositions (in, at, from, by, ) Wh-clauses ( What you need is, Where he lived was the Bronx ) and Content words Nouns Verbs Adjectives Adverbs
Task: Read the following extract from the US presidential election debates held in late 2004. Highlight the language you think is evaluative in function (favorable and unfavorable) Mr Lehrer: new question, Mr President. Two minutes. Do you believe the election of Senator Kerry on Nov. 2 would increase the chances of the US being hit by another 9/11- type terrorist attack? 1) Mr Bush: I don t believe it s going to happen. I believe I m going to win because the American people know I know how to lead. I ve shown the American people I know how to lead. I have I understand everybody in this country doesn t agree with the decisions that I ve had made. And I ve made some tough decisions. But people know where I stand. People out there listening know what I believe. And that s how best it is to keep peace. 2) This nation of ours has got a solemn duty to defeat this ideology of hate. And that s what they are, this is a group of killers who will not only kill here but kill children in Russia. That will attack unmercifully in Iraq hoping to shake our will. We have duty to defeat this enemy. We have duty to protect our children and grandchildren.
3) The best way to defeat them is to never waver, to be strong, to use every asset at our disposal. It s to constantly stay on the offensive. And at the same time spread liberty. And that s what people are seeing now happening in Afghanistan. Ten million citizens have registered to vote. It s a phenomenal statistic. That if given a chance to be free they will show up at the polls. Forty-one percent of those 10 million are women. 4) In Iraq, no doubt about it, it s tough. It s hard work. Incredibly hard. You know why? Because an enemy realizes the stakes. The enemy understands a free Iraq will be a major defeat in their ideology of hatred. That s why they re fighting so vociferously. 5) They showed up in Afghanistan when they were there because they tried to beat us and they didn t. And they re showing up in Iraq for the same reason. They re trying to defeat us and if we lose our will we lose. But if we remain strong and resolute we will defeat this enemy.
The Appraisal framework: an overview The Appraisal framework (Martin & White 1995 ) is a particular approach to exploring, describing and explaining the way language is used to evaluate, to adopt stances, to construct textual personas and to manage interpersonal positioning and relationships. The term Appraisal is used as a cover-all term to encompass all evaluative uses of language, including those by which speakers/writers adopt particular value positions or stances and by which they negotiate these stances with either actual or potential respondents.
A few examples of what the Appraisal framework enables us to investigates: how the different uses of evaluative language by speakers/writers act to construct different authorial voices and textual personas; how different genres and text types may conventionally employ different evaluative and otherwise rhetorical strategies; the communicative strategies by which some discourses (for example those of the media) construct supposedly objective' or impersonal modes of textuality.
Appraisal - the evaluative use of language - is seen to perform the following functions: 1. Attitudinal positioning writers/speakers indicate either a positive (praising) or negative (blaming) assessment of people, places, things, happenings and states of affairs. 1. Dialogistic positioning negotiation of interpersonal relationships between writer/speaker and reader/hearer (many utterances contain elements which play a responsive or an anticipatory role) 1. Intertextual positioning uses of language by which writers/speakers adopt evaluative positions towards what they represent as the views and statements of other speakers and writers
1. Attitudinal positioning It [the E-type Jaguar] is a masterpiece of styling whose proportions are dramatic yet perfectly judged and well-mannered; its crisp details are in complete harmony with the broader outlines of the gorgeous general arrangement, and, symbolically, it evokes with exquisite eloquence all the ideas of speed, glamour and romance associated with travel. You can just feel air and bodies rushing and swooning all over that lascivious shape. Never, ever, has that creaking old trope about form and function had a better character witness. (The Independent, Weekend Review: p.1 27/01/2001)
2. Dialogistic positioning Here is a very obvious and overt example of what we might term `dialogic anticipation' by the 2nd Century Greek historian Polybius (or at least by his translator). Some of my readers, I know, will be wondering why I have postponed until the moment my study of the Roman constitution and thus interrupted the flow of the narrative. (cited in Crismore 1989)
2. Intertextual positioning (a) a. Endorsement The endorsed utterance is one which the writer either directly or indirectly indicates support for, or agreement with. The endorsed utterance is represented as true or reliable or convincing through the use of quoting verbs such as show, demonstrate or adverbs such as convincingly Ex. The author shows that the mafia began in the 19th century. He also demonstrates how the mafia has forged links with Italy s ruling Christian Democrat party since the war Ex. The author espoused the thesis, convincingly propounded also by other Marxists, that Marx evolved from his Eurocentric perspective towards a stance of anticolonialism
2. Intertextual positioning (b) b. Disendorsement Writers/speakers distance themselves from the utterance, indicating that they take no responsibility for its reliability. This is commonly done by the use of a quoting verb such as claim and allege, adverbs such as reportedly (rumors are going round) or surprisingly, expression such as is sheer nonsense Ex. The author examines the religious believes he claims are inherent in terrorists fight. Ex. Even in jail there are many rumors circulating about Tyson. He reportedly said, We are keeping the date of the wedding secret.
2. Intertextual positioning (c) c. Non-endorsement (neutrality) Writers/speakers attitude towards what they are writing/saying is unobtrusive (neutral). This is commonly done by the use of neutral verbs such as say, report, also in their passive forms it is said that, it has been reported that Ex. The government says that people need to trust in law. Ex. The research team reported that women are more intelligent than men.
Remember: The use of a word or expression or a certain type of language tells us as much about the person speaking/writing as about the topic of the discourse itself. Denotation = the literal meaning of a word (its definition in a dictionary) Connotation = the associations evoked by a word in the mind of the speaker/hearer/reader
Task 1: Using a dictionary and the WEB, find the general evaluative connotations of the following items used to describe forms of government. In Notes, note down any other observations you might have, e.g. the associations of the item, where in the world it is applied, and so on. http://dictionary.cambridge.org/results.asp?dict=cald Word Good/Bad/Neutral Notes regime junta democracy dictatorship one-man rule
Task 2: Using a dictionary and the WEB, find the general evaluative connotations of the following items used to describe opponents of those in power. Word Good/Bad/Neutral Notes revolutionary fundamentalist dissident separatist
Task 3: Using a dictionary and the WEB, find the general evaluative connotations of the following items used to describe various political positions. Word Good/Bad/Neutral Notes activist hawk extremist radical moderate liberal maverick