1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Functions of Language
  4. Volume 25, Issue 3
  5. Article
Volume 25, Issue 3
  • ISSN 0929-998X
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9765
GBP
Buy:£15.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

History texts are not just disciplinary artefacts for describing, explaining or making arguments about the past. They play a key role in defining present-day group identities and their terms of affiliation. As such, they have generated a great deal of interest among functional linguists interested in how ideology is construed through language. But the ways history texts evaluate the past is not straightforward; they include a complex interplay of discourse participants putting forward a range of views toward the subject-matter. This article presents a framework for investigating evaluative meaning in historical discourse that aims to untangle this complex web of voices, showing how they work together to position readers to take up particular views toward the past. The framework brings together two prominent approaches to the study of evaluation: Martin & White’s (2005) Appraisal framework and Hunston’s (2000) notions of Status Value and Relevance. It posits four levels of evaluation (inter-, super-, extra- and meta-evaluation) that are grounded in insights from the field of historiography and reflect key disciplinary activities of historians.

© John Benjamins
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/fol.15053.mys
2018-11-02
2024-04-16

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/fol.15053.mys
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Barnard, Christopher
    2003 Pearl Harbor in Japanese high school history textbooks: The grammar and semantics of responsibility. InJ. R. Martin & Ruth Wodak (eds.), Re/reading the past: Critical and functional perspectives on time and value, 247–271. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/dapsac.8.14bar
     https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.8.14bar [Google Scholar]
  2. Barton, Keith C.
    2004 Primary sources in history: Breaking through the myths. The Phi Delta Kappan86(10). 745–753. 10.1177/003172170508601006
     https://doi.org/10.1177/003172170508601006 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bernstein, Basil
    2003 The structuring of pedagogic discourse (Vol. IV of Class, codes and control). London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Brune, Nick
    2003 Defining Canada: History, identity and culture. Oakville: McGraw-Hill.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Coffin, Caroline
    2000 History as discourse: Construals of time, cause and appraisal. Sydney: University of New South Wales PhD thesis.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. 2006 Historical discourse: The language of time, cause and evaluation. London: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Cortazzi, Martin & Lixian Jin
    2000 Evaluating evaluation in narrative. InSusan Hunston & Geoff Thompson (eds.), 102–120.
  8. Du Bois, John W.
    2007 The stance triangle. InRobert Englebretson (ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction, 139–182. Amsterdam: Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.164.07du
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.164.07du [Google Scholar]
  9. Goodwin, Doris Kearns
    1991 Lyndon Johnson and the American Dream. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Halliday, M. A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen
    2004 An introduction to functional grammar, 3rd edn.London: Hodder Education.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Haskell, Thomas L.
    1998 Objectivity is not neutrality: Explanatory schemes in history. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Hoey, Michael
    1983 On the surface of discourse. London: Allen & Unwin.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Hood, Susan
    2010 Appraising research: Evaluation in academic writing. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230274662
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230274662 [Google Scholar]
  14. Hunston, Susan
    1989 Evaluation in experimental research articles. Birmingham: University of Birmingham PhD thesis.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. 1994 Evaluation and organization in a sample of written academic discourse. InMalcolm Coulthard (ed.), Advances in written text analysis, 191–218. London: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. 1995 Evaluation and ideology in scientific writing. InMohsen Ghadessy (ed.), Register analysis: Theory and practice, 57–73. London: Pinter.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. 2000 Evaluation and the planes of discourse: Status and value in persuasive texts. InSusan Hunston & Geoff Thompson (eds.), 176–207.
  18. Hyland, Ken
    1994 Hedging in academic textbooks and EAP. English for Specific Purposes3(3). 239–256. 10.1016/0889‑4906(94)90004‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(94)90004-3 [Google Scholar]
  19. 2005 Metadiscourse. London: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Lee, Sook Hee
    2015 Evaluative stances in persuasive essays by undergraduate students: Focusing on appreciation resources. Text & Talk35(1). 49–76. 10.1515/text‑2014‑0029
     https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2014-0029 [Google Scholar]
  21. Macken-Horarik, Mary
    2003 Appraisal and the special instructiveness of narrative. Text23(2). 285–312. 10.1515/text.2003.012
     https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2003.012 [Google Scholar]
  22. Martin, J. R.
    1993 Life as a noun: Arresting the universe in science and the humanities. InM. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power, 221–267. London: Falmer.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Martin, J. R., Karl A. Maton & Erika S. Matruglio
    2010 Historical cosmologies: Epistemology and axiology in Australian secondary school history discourse. Revista Signos43(74). 443–463. 10.4067/S0718‑09342010000500003
     https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-09342010000500003 [Google Scholar]
  24. Martin, J. R. & Peter R. R. White
    2005 The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230511910
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230511910 [Google Scholar]
  25. Moss, Gillian
    2010 Textbook language, ideology and citizenship: The case of a history textbook in Colombia. Functions of Language17(1). 71–93. 10.1075/fol.17.1.03mos
     https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.17.1.03mos [Google Scholar]
  26. Myskow, Gordon
    2017 Surveying the historical landscape: The evaluative voice of history textbooks. Functional Linguistics4(7). 1–15. 10.1186/s40554‑017‑0039‑3
     https://doi.org/10.1186/s40554-017-0039-3 [Google Scholar]
  27. 2018a Calibrating the ‘right values’: The role of critical inquiry tasks in social studies textbooks. Visual Communication. 10.1177/1470357218778876
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1470357218778876 [Google Scholar]
  28. 2018b Changes in attitude: Evaluative language in secondary school and university history textbooks. Linguistics and Education43. 53–63. 10.1016/j.linged.2017.12.001
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2017.12.001 [Google Scholar]
  29. . In press. Appraisal in history: Construals of significance, fortune, and status. Linguistics and the Human Sciences.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Ngo, Thu & Len Unsworth
    2015 Reworking the Appraisal framework in ESL research: Refining attitude resources. Functional Linguistics2(1). 1–24. 10.1186/s40554‑015‑0013‑x
     https://doi.org/10.1186/s40554-015-0013-x [Google Scholar]
  31. Nir, Bracha & Elisabeth Zima
    2017 The power of engagement: Stance-taking, dialogical resonance and the construction of intersubjectivity. Functions of Language24(1). 3–15. 10.1075/fol.24.1.01nir
     https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.24.1.01nir [Google Scholar]
  32. Novick, Peter
    1988 That noble dream: The ‘objectivity question’ and the American historical profession. Cambridge: CUP. 10.1017/CBO9780511816345
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816345 [Google Scholar]
  33. Oteíza, Teresa
    2003 How contemporary history is presented in Chilean middle school textbooks. Discourse & Society14(5). 639–660. 10.1177/09579265030145005
     https://doi.org/10.1177/09579265030145005 [Google Scholar]
  34. Oteíza, Teresa & Claudio Pinuer
    2013 Valorative prosody and the symbolic construction of time in recent national historical discourses. Discourse Studies15(1). 43–64. 10.1177/1461445612466447
     https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445612466447 [Google Scholar]
  35. 2016 Appraisal framework and critical discourse studies: A joint approach to the study of historical memories from an intermodal perspective. International Journal of Language Studies10. 5–32.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Ricoeur, Paul
    2004 Memory, history and forgetting. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. 10.7208/chicago/9780226713465.001.0001
     https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226713465.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  37. Schleppegrell, Mary J., Mariana Achugar & Teresa Oteíza
    2004 The grammar of history: Enhancing content-based instruction through a functional focus on language. TESOL Quarterly38(1). 67–93. 10.2307/3588259
     https://doi.org/10.2307/3588259 [Google Scholar]
  38. Seixas, Peter
    1997 Mapping the terrain of historical significance. Social Education61(1). 22–27.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. 2000 Schweigen! Die Kinder!InPeter N. Stearns, Peter Seixas & Sam Wineburg (eds.), Knowing, teaching and learning history: National and international perspectives, 19–37. New York, NY: New York University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Tann, Ken
    2010 Imagining communities: A multifunctional approach to identity management in texts. InMonika Bednarek & J. R. Martin (eds.), New Discourse on Language, 163–194. London: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Thompson, Geoff & Jianglin Zhou
    2000 Evaluation and organization in text: The structuring role of evaluative disjuncts. InSusan Hunston & Geoff Thompson (eds.), 121–141.
  42. Veel, Robert & Caroline Coffin
    1996 Learning to think like an historian: The language of secondary school history. InRuqaiya Hasan & Geoff Williams (eds.), Literacy in Society, 191–231. London: Longman.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. White, Peter R. R.
    2003 Beyond modality and hedging: A dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance. Text23(2). 259–284. 10.1515/text.2003.011
     https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2003.011 [Google Scholar]
  44. 2012 Exploring the axiological workings of ‘reporter voice’ news stories: Attribution and attitudinal positioning. Discourse, Context & Media12(3). 57–67. 10.1016/j.dcm.2012.10.004
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2012.10.004 [Google Scholar]
  45. Wignell, Peter
    1994 Genre across the curriculum. Linguistics and Education6(4). 355–372. 10.1016/0898‑5898(94)90003‑5
     https://doi.org/10.1016/0898-5898(94)90003-5 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/fol.15053.mys
Loading
A framework for analyzing evaluative language in historical discourse
Functions of Language 25, 335 (2018); https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.15053.mys
/content/journals/10.1075/fol.15053.mys
/content/journals/10.1075/fol.15053.mys
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error