chapter11 interpersonal meaning written

7252019 Chapter11 Interpersonal Meaning Written

httpslidepdfcomreaderfullchapter11-interpersonal-meaning-written 122

191

TRACKING INTERPERSONAL

STYLE THE USE OF

FUNCTIONAL LANGUAGE ANALYSIS IN COLLEGE

WRITING INSTRUCTION

Zak Lancaster Wake Forest University

INTRODUCTION

Rhetorical Genre Studies or RGS has had much in1047298uence in recent years onreconceptualizing the goals of college level writing instruction in North Americaboth in the contexts of 1047297rst-year composition (FYC) and upper-level writing inthe disciplines One broad goal for FYC speci1047297cally has been conceptualized

as helping students gain ldquogenre awarenessrdquo (see the work of Beaufort Devitt Johns) or ldquoawareness of the social and ideological aspects of genre productionand consumptionrdquo (Cheng 2007 p 304) By assisting students to develop anuanced awareness of genremdashand not just familiarity with particular genresmdashitis hoped that students will be better equipped to examine samples of a genrethey are working in with a keen rhetorical eye approach unfamiliar writingsituations with greater con1047297dence in their existing store of genre knowledgeand learn to make more deliberate genre choices in their own writingmdashwhich

may include motivated disruptions of genre expectations A key instructionalmethod for fostering this kind of nuanced genre awareness is to train students toanalyze genres tracking how textual choices shape and are shaped by contextualdynamics Tis approach is discussed by among others Amy Devitt AnisBawarshi and Mary Jo Reiff (ldquoMaterialityrdquo) who argue that RGS informs adiscourse analytic approach that ldquolinks patterns of language use to patterns ofsocial behaviorrdquo and thus ldquoallows students and researchers to recognize how lsquolivedtextualityrsquo plays a role in the lived experience of a grouprdquo (2003 p 542) Te

advantage of the approach as Devitt et al explain is that it ldquofocuses on the actualuses of texts in all their messiness and with all their potential consequencesrdquo andldquoties that use to actual language to the smaller bits of language that alert analyststo underlying ideas values and beliefsrdquo (2003 p 543)



Lancaster

192

As suggested by the focus on language and text in the above explanationundertaking genre analysis in FYC has the potential to place stylistic analysisback on compositionrsquos center stage in a theoretically-grounded manner enablinginstructors and students to track textual patterns in a way that is sensitive to

contextual dynamics Nevertheless Irsquod like to suggest in this chapter that theapproach has not been as fully operationalized for the classroom as it could beif the textual aspects of genre analysis were considered with more systematicattention to language use As Devitt notes (ldquoRefusingrdquo) RGS has largelydistanced itself from matters of form and so the ldquosmaller bits of languagerdquoreferred to above have not been foregrounded in published genre analyses norhave speci1047297c analytic constructs that students and instructors can use to guidethe process of noticing these bits of language connecting them to other bits

of language and discerning their socio-rhetorical purposes in samples of genreunder analysis My argument in this chapter is that systematic approaches totext analysis are necessary if writing instructors are to support studentsrsquo analysesof genre in ways that help them to identify subtle patterns of text that connectto context Starting from this initial position Irsquod like to suggest that genre-register theory in systemic functional linguistics or SFL can off er one veryuseful way to get started connecting genre as an abstract concept to the nuts andbolts of analyzing genre samples systematically and in detail

SFL is a theory of language developed from the work of the linguist MichaelHalliday (see eg ldquoExplorationsrdquo ldquoAn Introductionrdquo) that explores how ourchoices in language re1047298ect and work to realize key contextual variables that arealways at play in situations where language is used Tese are the 1047297eld (the topicof the text the nature of the social action) the tenor (the relationship betweenparticipants ie writer and reader) and the mode (the part that language playsand what the participants expect the language to do for them in the situation)

According to this theory stylistic qualities of a given text are constructed through

patterns of language choices that are motivated by the1047297

eld tenor and modeFor example as Jonathan Buehlrsquos chapter (this volume) helps us to understandscience discourse is the way that it is (lexically dense and highly nominalized)because the discourse has evolved over time to accommodate the expression ofnew kinds of knowledge (1047297eld) and interpersonal relationships (tenor)

Williamsrsquo lessons in Style Ten Lessons in Clarity and Grace draw liberallyfrom Hallidayrsquos meaning-based grammar and from Halliday and Hasanrsquos workon textual cohesion Building on this earlier work in SFL James R Martin andDavid Rose among others have recently developed a set of discourse-based toolsfor ldquotackling a textrdquo (Martin amp Rose 2007) and these tools enable analysts toexplore how meanings (ideational interpersonal and textual) are constructedin discourse Because these analytic tools do not assume prior knowledge of



193

Tracking Interpersonal Style

SFL they are ideal for use in composition classrooms when the goal is to unpickhow a textrsquos abstract qualitiesmdashsuch as its ldquo1047298owrdquo or ldquostylerdquomdashare constructedthrough language

In this chapter I focus speci1047297cally on the SFL-based Appraisal framework

(developed most fully in Martin and White) in order to discuss how patterns oflanguage use construct a textrsquos interpersonal style Building from the clause-levelresources described by Halliday (ldquoAn Introductionrdquo) the Appraisal frameworkis useful for tracking how a particular ldquovoicerdquo or persona is constructed in atext how other voices and perspectives are brought into play how a ff ect and

judgment are encoded how evaluative meanings are scaled up and down inforce and focus and how community-recognized knowledge and values aresignaled As an analytic tool Appraisal helps to explore how these meanings

may be infused in a text below readersrsquo and writersrsquo consciousness patterningtogether in certain ways to construct the textrsquos interpersonal style In this waythe analysis is useful for getting students and instructors to think concretely interms of the frequently cited dictum that stylistic choices are meaningful

In order to motivate the use of SFL-based discourse analysis in compositioninstruction I begin with a very brief explanation of compositionrsquos relationshipto linguistics and then turn to recent work in rhetoric and composition studieson rhetorical grammar I place emphasis on aspects of that approach that seem

to be working toward the goal of operationalizing rhetorical genre analysis forthe composition class and those aspects that do not I then use this critique todemonstrate how key analytic concepts from SFL including genre register andinterpersonal meanings can aid in the stylistic analysis of academic texts Tisdiscussion builds on Nora Baconrsquos general point (in this volume) that style isvery much present in academic discourse and that analysis of stylistic choices inacademic writing is of high educational value for FYC instruction

THE BACKGROUNDING OF LANGUAGEIN COMPOSITION STUDIES

Because I am suggesting that students and instructors take up linguisticanalysis to analyze stylistic patterns in genre samples a brief discussion ofcompositionrsquos relationship to the 1047297eld of linguistics seems relevant Compositionrsquosdistancing from linguistics has been well documented (see for example Bartonand Stygall Johnson and Pace and MacDonald) and it is more than partly

justi1047297ed It has to do with at least three interconnected phenomena the shiftfrom a product to process-oriented view of writing which had the eff ect ofpositioning questions about textual patterns as representative of a ldquoproductrdquo



Lancaster

194

or static view of writing the increasing awareness that the structuralist andgenerative linguistics of the sixties and seventies had little to off er either ourteaching of writing or our study of the production and reception of actual textsand perhaps most importantly the increasing use of social constructionist

theories to examine texts which had the eff ect of shifting attention away fromthe texts themselves to their larger social contexts Tis latter move referredto widely as ldquothe social turnrdquo has been important for bringing about a de-centering of language and text in favor of a stronger focus on the social patternsof activity revolving around the interpretation and (re)production of texts

Tis de-centering of language is understandable given compositionrsquos pastprivileging of form without consideration of context as seen in older formalistapproaches It is also understandable given the 1047297eldrsquos past focus on the individual

writer engaged solely in a cognitive process of problem-solving a point of viewre1047298ected in much work on text linguistics (eg Beaugrande and Dressler) Irsquodlike to suggest however that the ldquosocial turnrdquo has succeeded so well in directingthe 1047297eldrsquos gaze upwards and outwards above and beyond the linguistic featuresof texts that most compositionists nowadays tend not to think about meaningas construed through the language we use to construct texts but rather asresiding in the activities that surround and govern the workings of texts As aresult the 1047297eldrsquos theoretical understanding of language and how it functions as

a meaning-making resource has been under-exploredTis de-centering of language is evident in Devitt Bawarshi and Reiff rsquos

genre-based textbook Scenes of Writing which is geared toward training studentsto analyze genres and raise their genre awareness To analyze a genre the authorsoutline four analytical steps

1 Collect Samples of the Genre2 Identify the Scene and Describe the Situation in Which the Genre is

Used

3 Identify and Describe Patterns in the Genrersquos Features4 Analyze What Tese Patterns Reveal about the Situation and Scene(2003 pp 93-94)

Tese four steps provide a useful overarching direction for analysis Tey donot however provide the type of detailed support needed to account for salientpatterns in language use that are not apparent after initially scanning a textUnder the third step students are prompted to consider ldquopatterns in the genrersquosfeaturesrdquo for example whether sentences are long or short complex or simpleand whether they are in passive or active voice Students are also prompted toconsider whether the sentences ldquoshare a certain stylerdquo and ldquowhat diction is mostcommonrdquo (Devitt Bawarshi amp Reiff 2003 p 94) Tis level of analysis Irsquod liketo suggest is not as nuanced as it could be to guide students toward analyzing



195


how ldquosmaller bits of languagerdquo can reveal ldquounderlying ideas values and beliefsrdquoas suggested above and so a number of questions arise For one what advicecan we give students if they cannot identify recurring patterns in the texts theyare analyzing What analytic tools are available to guide studentsrsquo process of

identifying recurring and co-occurring patternsmdashones that may not standout after initial scansmdashand then connecting those patterns to larger rhetoricalfunctions How can students develop an analytic vocabulary or meta-languagefor talking about wordphrase clause and text level features in genres underexamination in meaningful and concrete ways

RHETORICAL GRAMMAR

Rhetorical grammar is one approach to analyzing wordphrase clauseand text level features of discourse that is potentially valuable for studentsrsquogenre analysis projects Laura Micciche de1047297nes rhetorical grammar as ldquousinggrammatical devices that enable us to respond appropriately and eff ectively toa situationrdquo (2004 p 719) As opposed to analyzing ldquostylerdquo which Miccichede1047297nes as the ldquolsquoextraordinaryrsquo use of languagerdquo analyzing rhetorical grammarmeans tracking the rhetorical purposes of seemingly minor choices in ldquothe

lsquoordinaryrsquo use of languagemdashgrammarrdquo (2004 p 717) In this way Miccicheendorses a pedagogical goal that rings familiar with Devittrsquos goal of alertingstudents to ldquopurposes behind formsrdquo (2004 p 197) As Micciche writes

Te grammatical choices we makemdashincluding pronoun useactive or passive verb constructions and sentence patternsmdashrepresent relations between writers and the world they live in

Word choice and sentence structure are an expression of the

way we attend to the words of others the way we positionourselves in relation to others (2004 p 719)

Instruction in rhetorical grammar Micciche points out can assist learnersin coming to see the rhetorical eff ects of particular syntactic and lexical choicesFor this reason rhetorical grammar is ldquojust as central to compositionrsquos drivingcommitment to teach critical thinking and cultural critique as is readingrhetorically understanding the signi1047297cance of cultural diff erence and engagingin community work through service-learning initiativesrdquo (2004 p 717)

A concrete method that Micciche explains for sharpening studentsrsquosensitivity to rhetorical grammar is to have students keep commonplace booksin which they record grammatical patterns from their readings that are of



Lancaster

196

interest to them and then practice using those patterns to construct texts oftheir own Tis method encourages students to ldquotinker with language seeinghow it is crafted and directed rather than as simply lsquocorrectrsquo or lsquoincorrectrsquordquo(Micciche 2004 p 724) Further by tinkering with grammatical choices

students can begin to take notice of how subtle manipulation of language canhave important political rami1047297cations Micciche demonstrates for examplehow an analysis of ldquohedgingrdquo devices such ldquolikelyrdquo and the verb ldquobelieverdquo inGeorge Bushrsquos 2002 speech to the United Nationsmdashas in Bushrsquos claim thatldquoUN inspectors believe Iraq has produced two to four times the amount ofbiological agents it declaredrdquomdashcan open up a discussion with students aboutstandards for providing evidence when making a case for declaring war (2004p 725) Keeping commonplace books therefore pushes students ldquoto think in

unfamiliar ways about texts to which they have developed familiar responsesrdquo(Micciche 2004 p 727) In this way instruction in rhetorical grammar canarm students with concrete ways of looking at and talking about language andpotentially can enable them to home in on subtle ways that arguments arebuilt up through language in particular texts Miccichersquos discussion of rhetoricalgrammar therefore goes a long way toward revealing the tension betweenformal constraint and choice that gives rise to creative expression and nuancedrhetorical decisions

One potential limitation of the approach however is that it is not clearhow rhetorical grammar analysis is informed and shaped by considerationsof genre In particular neither Miccichersquos article nor Martha Kollnrsquos widelyused textbook treats explicitly the ways in which genre acts as a superordinateconstraint on the array of possible grammatical choices speakerswriters canmake in a given rhetorical context or the ways genre serves as a guidepost fordirecting the process of rhetorical grammar analysis To return to Miccichersquosexample of Bushrsquos speech an important sequence of questions for analyzing this

speech from a genre and rhetorical grammar perspective include What are thecommunicative purposes of US presidential speeches to the UN Under whatcircumstances are they typically delivered What are some typical rhetoricalmoves used in other crisis speeches How does Bushrsquos particular speech relateto these genres and how is its structure similar to or diff erent from typicalorganizational stages in these other genres Ten we may ask in which movesdo ldquohedgingrdquo devices or expressions of modality accumulate most abundantly

What rhetorical work do these devices accomplish within the context of aparticular move or argumentative stage What language features accumulateand pattern together with other language features in other moves

In pursuing questions such as these rhetorical grammar and genre analysiscan be brought together so that instructors and students can track ways that



197


grammatical choices accumulate and pattern together in particular phases ofa text as it unfolds students and instructors can discuss how these patternscreate waves of meaning that achieve generic purposes and perhaps give rise toa particular style for the sample of the genre under investigation

A second limitation of rhetorical grammar analysismdashone that is characteristicof most other linguistically oriented approaches to discourse analysismdashis thatthe discussions of grammaticalrhetorical ldquochoicesrdquo do not specify what exactlyit is that is chosen when a grammatical or rhetorical choice is made In other

words making a choice suggests that a speakerwriter is at least tacitly aware ofmultiple other available options for producing related meanings in a particularsituation but those other available options tend not to be discussed explicitlyTe usefulness of the SFL approach to discourse analysis to which I now

turn is that it proposes networks of increasingly delicate levels of options thatare available in various linguistic systems (for example the system of mood)to achieve particular discourse level meanings Tese system networks helpanalysts track the choices that speakerswriters have made from a network ofother choices they could have made but did not

LOCATING STYLE IN SFL GENREREGISTER THEORY

As mentioned above SFL explores language choices in terms of the meaningsthey realize As Mary Schleppegrell explains

Every language off ers its speakerswriters a wealth of optionsfor construing meaning SFL facilitates exploration of mean-ing in context through a comprehensive text-based grammarthan enables analysts to recognize the choices speakers and

writers make from the linguistic systems and to explore howthose choices are functional for construing meanings of dif-ferent kinds (2011 p 21)

Tese choices and meanings are analyzed at the most general level throughthe connected concepts of genre and register

GENRE

Genre in SFL has been de1047297ned as ldquostaged goal-oriented social processesrdquo(Martin 1998 p 412) Importantly genre in this view operates at the broadcontext of culture which is a point of view somewhat at odds with the RGS view



Lancaster

198

of genre as socially situated Speci1047297c diff erences in perspectives and purposes ofSFL and RGS approaches to genre have been discussed in detail elsewhere (seeeg Bawarshi amp Reiff Devitt Hyon Martin amp Rose 2008) but primarily itshould be noted that in the RGS view genres are 1047298uid modes of action that can

be located within particular communities (ie they are socially situated) thisis because they regularly facilitate communicative purposes among participantsin a particular social group In the SFL perspective genres are recurring texttypes that grow out of social purposes within the culture at large narratives forexample are used to resolve complications in a story and critical responses areused to challenge the message of a text

It is conceivably possible to reconcile the RGS and SFL views of genre asothers have noted by casting the SFL conceptualization as ldquoelementalrdquo genres

that pattern together in particular ways to construct larger ldquomacrordquo genresTenure and promotion reports for example are socially situated genres that arecomprised of accounts explanations narratives personal responses and so on andthese elemental genres are realized through recurring textual stages Attemptingto reconcile the two approaches in this way has merit but to proceed with genreanalysis it is arguably more important to understand the SFL concept of register Register is the crucial component in SFL genre theory that tends to be under-discussed in othersrsquo accounts of SFL genre theory and pedagogy

R EGISTER

Analyzing the schematic structure of elemental genres like accounts andexpositions does little in and of itself to help forward our understanding of howgenres are infused with meanings or how meanings vary in speci1047297c instancesor realizations of a genre in a particular context Register therefore is a speci1047297ctheory of social context that helps to answer these questions Register analysis

explores how three contextual variables are both re1047298

ected and realized in everysituation where language is used Tese variables are as identi1047297ed above the 1047297 eld of discourse (the topic of the text the nature of the social action) the tenor of discourse (the relationship between participants ie writer and reader) andthe mode of discourse (the part that language plays what the participants expectthe language to do for them in the situation) Using this linguistically orientedtheory of context we can talk for example about how interpersonal meaningsare realized through speci1047297c lexico-grammatical choices that both re1047298ect andshape the tenor or participant relations in a given context

As illustration of this last point consider the case of the critical response genre Critical responses are one of many response genres frequently assignedin school contexts (on response genres see Christie amp Derewianka Martin



199


amp Rose 2008) Te critical response is realized through the stages ofevaluation deconstruction and challenge Generally the author(s) 1047297rst evaluatesa text (evaluation) then breaks the text down by explaining how it works(deconstruction) and then challenges some aspect of the message in the text

(challenge) When an individual author constructs a critical response in a givensituational contextmdashfor a particular group of readers on a particular topicthrough a particular mode of discoursemdashhis or her speci1047297c choices in languagerange in degree of formality commitment explicitness and other factors relatedto the interpersonal context To illustrate consider the following two versionsof an excerpt from a challenge stage of a published New Left Review article by

Joshua Cohen and Joel Rogers Te one on the left is the actual publishedversion and the one on the right is my modi1047297ed version

Published Version by Cohen ampRogers

My Modi1047297ed Version

Chomsky presents reams ofevidence for the [propaganda]modelhellip NonethelessChomskyrsquos view of the media andthe manufacture of consent seems

overstated in three ways Firstthe claim that business peopleand state managers are in themain relatively ldquofree of illusionrdquoseems overdrawn at least whenthat claim is off ered (as Chomskyusually off ers it) withoutsubstantial quali1047297cationhellip

Evidence is presented forthe [propaganda] modelhellipNonetheless in three waysChomsky overstates the argumentthat the media manufacture

consent First he completelyoverdraws the claim that businesspeople and state managers arein the main relatively ldquofree ofillusionrdquo he certainly overdrawsthis claim when he off ers it

without substantial quali1047297cationas he frequently doeshellip

One similarity between the versions is that they are both relatively formalTey both use diction appropriate for scholarly journalistic discourse (egnonetheless overstates overdraws substantial quali 1047297 cation) In addition thelength and complexity of clauses are comparable and they both use a mix ofactive and passive constructions But the diff erences in meaning are importantand they are accomplished through language in two basic ways

First there is a diff erence in the kind of nouns that serve as the theme for theforthcoming evaluations As Nora Bacon notes in her chapter in this volumeacademic writing often cannot use persons as grammatical subjects because ofthe frequent need to deal with abstract concepts Te use of abstract sentencesubjects (rather than personal ones) can become even more complex when the



Lancaster

200

task at hand is to critically evaluate othersrsquo work In Cohen and Rogersrsquos text (thepublished one) only the 1047297rst clause and one parenthetical clause toward the endof the passage thematize a person Chomsky whereas the second clause and eachremaining clause thematize abstractions Chomskyrsquos view hellip the claim hellip and

that claim Te pattern is reversed in my modi1047297ed version where the 1047297rst clausethematizes an abstraction Evidence and the second and remaining clausesthematize a person Chomsky he he and he Te choice then about what totake as the point of departure for the message turns on whether the forthcomingevaluation can be interpreted as praise or as critique In other words thatthere is evidence presented for the propaganda model can be understood as apositive appraisal while the other appraisals can only be understood as critiques(overstated overdrawn) Te diff erence in theme selection here therefore bears

on the degree of interpersonal alignment with the subject of the evaluationChomsky and his views on the media Cohen and Rogersrsquo grammatical choicesthat is are at least partly guided by their purpose of constructing a criticallydistanced stance when engaging in critique of Chomskyrsquos work on the media

Second there is a diff erence in the way the authorial voice modulates itscommitment to the evaluations being put forth In the published version theauthorial voice reduces the level of commitment when putting forth critiquesTis is accomplished through the use of the expressions seems and usually while

the authorial voice ampli1047297es the proposition that Chomsky presents evidence(Compare reams of evidence with much evidence ) Te opposite pattern obtainsin my modi1047297ed version Te authorial voice is highly committed to the critiques(completely overdraws frequently does ) while the passive construction of the 1047297rstclause works to construct a more reluctant concession regarding the existenceof evidence

Trough this brief register analysis then we can be very explicit about howCohen and Rogers construct a textual voice that is at once critical of Chomskyrsquos

views on the media and committed to the basic set of value con1047297

gurationsthat many New Left Review readers are likely to associate with Chomskyrsquospoint of view Tis positive positioning is accomplished by placing Chomsky in theme position and amplifying the positive evaluationmdashthat this personChomsky presents reams of evidence In terms of negative evaluations thetextual voice is more distant this distance is accomplished by backgroundingthe human participant thematizing abstractions and using the appearance-based evidential seems to signal willingness to reconsider the critique In myversion the interpersonal positioning is the opposite Choices in wording framethe textual voice as interpersonally involved and committed to the critiques ofChomskyrsquos views on the media but distant from Chomsky as a person (orthe values he represents) when it comes to saying anything positive A close



201


examination of Cohen and Rogersrsquo article reveals in addition to many othercomplex rhetorical strategies recurring patterns in these con1047297gurations Hereare further examples (positivenegative appraisals are in italics and appearance-based evidentials are shaded)

Positive evaluationbull With copious documentation he e ff ectively makes the case that hellip

Negative evaluations bull Second hellip the modelrsquos claim that hellip seems exaggerated hellipbull Te ldquoBackroom Boysrdquo example just given indicates otherwise

Tis brief analysis then challenges the view that these textual patternsrepresent some stylistic ldquoticrdquo that is characteristic to Cohen and Rogers asindividual authors Rather I am suggesting that we can account for thesepatterns in terms of the register variables of 1047297eld tenor and mode Speci1047297callythe diff erence in meanings between the original version and my modi1047297ed onecan be best analyzed in terms of tenor in this case the interpersonal distancebetween the authors and the subject of the critique (Chomsky and his mediaanalyses) and also importantly the ways the authors choose to position

themselves in relation to their readersrsquo perspectives on Chomsky and his workTe particular set of values that the New Left Review represents and that itsreaders are likely to bring to their reading of the article factor into Cohenand Rogersrsquo (perhaps tacit) choices for what to place in theme position andhow to construct an interpersonal stance in regard to those values We couldimagine register con1047297gurations where my modi1047297ed version would be moreinterpersonally eff ective for example contexts where Chomskyrsquos work on themedia tends to be met with more committed resistance

Trough this type of analysis students can come to see how particular stylisticchoicesmdashfor example the choice to be dialogically expansive (this seems to be the

case ) dialogically contractive (this is de 1047297 nitely the case ) or dialogically disengaged(this is the case )mdashmay vary within instances of the same genre (eg a criticalreview article) in light of particular contextual variables To make increasinglysubtler shades of distinctions in interpersonal positioning and begin to homein on a particular textrsquos or authorrsquos style of interpersonal positioning SFL-based

Appraisal theory is useful for tracking the choices that speakerswriters make toencode attitudinal meanings adjust degrees of evaluations and contract andexpand dialogical space As Martin and White explain the framework exploresldquohow writersspeakers construe for themselves particular authorial identities orpersonae with how they align or disalign themselves with actual or potential



Lancaster

202

Table 1 Engagement resources in excerpts from economics and politicaltheory term papers

From challenge stage of A-graded criti-

cal response in economics


cal response in political theory

(1) Te result of this kind ofmarket structure is a system in

which insurance 1047297rms controlsigni1047297cant market power as amonopsony to medical practitionersand a monopoly to patients (2)

Te Supreme Court rejected theargument that the Federationrsquosactions were designed to protectpatients from insufficient dentaltreatment stating that the idea ofthe provision of information leadingto adverse outcomes was directlyagainst the spirit of the Sherman

Act (3) However their reasoningthat insurance companies actalmost as simple representatives ofpatients is not upheld by the currentsituation (4)Te object of the healthinsurance company is to maximizepro1047297t not to maximize the healthof the patient (5) If insurance were

purchased directly by the patientcompetition among providers couldequate the objects of both providerand patient (6) However a perfectlycompetitive market clearly is notavailable to many of the consumers

who purchase insurance directly

(1) With his theory established Ithink Rawlsrsquo 1047297rst response to Fraser

would be that the cultural injusticesshe believes require recognition arealready accounted for in his ldquofullyadequate scheme of equal basic rightsrdquo

(2) Rawls proposes that one wayof forming a list of basic rights andliberties is to consider what is essentialto ldquoprovide the political and socialconditions essential for the adequatedevelopment and full exercise of thetwo moral powers of free and equalpersonsrdquo

(3) It seems obvious that personsare unable to adequately developand exercise their moral powersunder conditions of extreme culturaldisenfranchisement (4) If a personis ldquoroutinely maligned or disparagedhellip in everyday life interactionsrdquo thenit is unlikely that they will be able to

participate in the means of acquiringthe moral powers and will certainlybe unable to fully exercise their moralpower (5) For example if a woman isunable to go to school and be educatedthen it is unlikely she will be able toadequately develop her moral power(6) Further if she is then unable tofully participate in society she will belimited in the exercise of her moralpower



203


respondents and with how they construct for their texts an intended or idealaudiencerdquo (2005 p 1)

TRACKING INTERPERSONAL STANCE983085TAKING

Appraisal theory makes use of three interrelated sub-systems to track choicesin interpersonal meaning Attitude Graduation and Engagement Attitude tracks meanings related to feelings and a ff ect judgment of people (theirmotives and behavior) and appreciation of the aesthetic quality of thingsGraduation tracks meanings related to raising or lowering the force and focusof propositions (in terms of intensity quantity preciseness and protypicality)

And 1047297nally Engagement inspired as it is by Bakhtinian notions of heteroglossiaand dialogism tracks meanings related to engagement with othersrsquo voices andperspectives Appraisal analysis is useful for systematically tracking how thesequencing and con1047297guration of various interpersonal resources of languagevary depending on the genre under analysis

To illustrate the following paragraph is from a second year studentrsquosargumentative essay written in a political science course Tis paragraphdemonstrates how particular con1047297gurations of Appraisal resources can cluster

together to create a distinct interpersonal style (Resources of Attitude are inunderlined and resources of Graduation are in 983155983149983137983148983148 983139983137983152983155)

(1) Firstly Zakariarsquos implication that the forces that movedinto power in Bosnia were counterproductive ones to the

American ends is 983156983151983156983137983148983148983161 irrelevant (2) If America founddemocracy to 983156983154983157983148983161 be such a noble cause to spread then983155983157983154983141983148983161 it would not violate a nationrsquos sovereignty in an at-

tempt to preserve its democratic status (3) Although ostensi-bly this would tie into his greater thesis regarding liberty as alesser need than democracy as ideals America has worked tospread his generous usage of the term democracy here andhis inability to 983152983154983151983152983141983154983148983161 hold it true to its de1047297nition 983156983151983156983137983148983148983161 undermines his insistence in conceptual exactness and diff er-entiation between democracy and liberty in the 1047297rst place

Tis paragraph makes use of many Appraisal resources Te meaningsthat overwhelm the paragraph however have to do with on the one hand

Attitudinal resources of judgment (noble violate generous inability to properly hold it true to its de 1047297 nition) and appreciation (irrelevant undermines ) and



Lancaster

204

on the other hand Graduation resources of force (totally surely ) and focus(truly properly ) In terms of sequencing the high force appreciation in the1047297rst sentencemdashthat Zakariarsquos claim is ldquototally irrelevantrdquomdashsets up a wave ofstrongly negative meanings that spread through the remainder of the paragraph

Tis general spreading-through partly explains why the use of the conditionalstructure in the 1047297rst part of sentence 2 (If

America found hellip) works to reinforcethe negative meaning by ironically reconsidering Zakariarsquos claim after having

just forcefully rejected it Tis ironic meaning is carried through in the secondpart of sentence 2mdashthen SURELY it would not hellipmdashby strongly negating aproposition that we can assume the author in fact endorses that ldquoAmericardquohas violated a nationrsquos sovereignty Finally the ironically and forcefully criticalstance is carried through in the lengthy third sentence by the sarcastic judgment

of Zakariarsquos use of the term ldquodemocracyrdquo as generous combined with the moreexplicitly negative judgment his inability to properly hold it true to its de 1047297 nition Tis studentrsquos critiques of Zakariarsquos reasoning then are expressed in a style ofstance-taking that is explicitly evaluative strongly committed and dialogicallycontractive

Appraisal analyses of undergraduate student writing (Coffin DerewiankaTang Wu) show that the style of stance-taking displayed in this critique ofZakaria is not always rewarded in university contexts calling for ldquocritical

discussionrdquo of texts Particularly as students progress into upper-level writingcourses in the disciplines they are expected to construct stances that are at oncecritical authoritative and dialogically expansive Beverly Derewianka foundfor example that writing from more advanced students tended to constructstances that were ldquoexplicitly open to other voices and possibilitiesrdquo (2009 p162) Trough the use of various Engagement strategies more advanced andpro1047297cient writers tend to encode in their texts ldquoan awareness of the problematicconstructed and intersubjective nature of meaning-makingrdquo (Derewianka

2009 p 163) Unlike the critique of Zakaria above which uses heavily rampedup and ironic judgments the texts Derewianka analyzed in her study of student writing worked to carefully juxtapose ldquoother voices [that] are explicitly drawninto the discussion interpreted analyzed critiqued and played off against eachotherrdquo (2009 p 163)

Te particular choices explored by the Appraisal sub-system of Engagement involve the way writersspeakers engage with other voices and perspectivesby directly acknowledging them or by denying countering conceding orentertaining those perspectives Dialogically contractive wordings work toboost the speakerrsquoswriterrsquos commitment to the proposition being put forthin so doing they contract space for the inclusion of alternative perspectivesOptions for contracting the dialogic space include



205


pronouncing an assertion (I am convinced that hellip)

a ffirming a proposition (clearly certainly obviously it is trueis the case)

disclaiming alternative views (It is not the case hellip rather hellip)conceding and countering alternative views (It is true thathellip but hellip)

Dialogically expansive wordings in contrast lower the speakerrsquoswriterrsquoscommitment to the proposition being put forth and thus expand space forthe inclusion of alternative perspectives Available options for opening up thedialogic space include

suggesting (one way to proceed is hellip)

conjecturing (perhaps probably it is likely hellip)

evidentializing (it seemsappears that hellip)

hypothetical reasoning (if we grant that hellip then we hellip)

attributing views to others (Chomsky states that hellip accord-ing to experts)

Te options of conjecturing and evidentializing have been viewed in thelinguistics literature on hedging or displaying uncertainty andor ldquodeferencemodesty or respectrdquo (Hyland 2000 p 88) In the Engagement framework theyare seen more as functioning to open up space for the inclusion of alternativeviews and as Martin and White explain to extend off ers of solidarity toimagined readers who are not already aligned with the authorrsquos point of view(2005 p 126) Trough the use of this framework analysts can make explicit

the speci1047297

c choices in interpersonal stance-taking that speakerswriters havemade and track the ways those choices pattern together to create a particularinterpersonal style

USING ENGAGEMENT TO ANALYZEDISCIPLINARY STYLES OF STANCE983085TAKING

One useful project that students and instructors can explore in the context ofFYC is the ways in which similar genres across disciplines may be characterizedby diff erent stance-taking styles For example how might argumentation inthe contexts of classroom genres calling for ldquodiscussionrdquo or ldquocritical reasoningrdquo



Lancaster

206

assume subtly diff erent and discipline-speci1047297c ways of positioning the textualvoices vis-agrave-vis anticipated readers

Before proceeding with illustrations let me concede that such a project isa complex undertaking One 1047297nding from Chris Taiss and Terry Zawackirsquos

Engaged Writers Dynamic Disciplines is that the causes for miscommunicationbetween students and faculty about good writing often result from 1047297ve largelyunexamined contexts at work in the design and evaluation of any writingassignment ldquothe academic the disciplinary the subdisciplinary the local orinstitutional and the idiosyncratic or personalrdquo (2006 p 138) Many or mostinstructors have difficulty stepping outside their own ldquoways of knowing doingand writingrdquo (Carter 2007 p 385) to re1047298ect on which of these contexts areat play when they design writing assignments and develop evaluative criteria

When it comes to talking about stylistic patterns at work in student writingtherefore analyses of student-produced classroom genres may point to valuedfeatures of a general academic style (as opposed to a journalistic or conversationalstyle) a broad disciplinary style (economics discourse) a sub-disciplinary style(discourse in economic regulation and antitrust policy) a sub-disciplinary stylefavored at a particular institution or an authorrsquos idiosyncratic style For thislast context Bacon (this volume) lists such factors as the writersrsquo ldquopersonalitymood knowledge experience professional status ethnicity gender pro1047297ciency

with language and so onrdquo When an interpersonal style is unpicked then anyof these contextual variables may be seen as relevant and making these complexinterpretations can be a valuable exercise for student writers in the context ofFYC

Pursuing this line of analysis I used the Engagement framework discussedabove to code two undergraduate studentsrsquo argumentative essays one ineconomics and the other in political theoryTe two paragraphs presented beloware comparable because (a) they are both from the critical response sections of

the respective papers which called for evaluation and reasoned argumentation(b) they were both written by fourth year students at the same large publicuniversity who were majoring in the respective disciplines and (c) they bothreceived Arsquos and were praised by the instructors for sophisticated ldquocriticalreasoningrdquo Te economics text was written in an upper-level undergraduatecourse focused on economic regulation and antitrust policy and in this passagethe student is challenging the reasoning of the Supreme Court Te politicaltheory text was written an upper-level undergraduate course on twentiethcentury political thought and in this passage the student is using John Rawlrsquosconcept of justice as fairness to challenge Nancy Fraserrsquos argument in her paperldquoFrom Redistribution to Recognitionrdquo (Dialogically expansive resources are set



207


in shaded text and contractive resources are underlined As with my analysisof the studentrsquos critique of Zakaria above I have highlighted here the lexico-grammatical ldquotriggersrdquo for discourse semantic options)

An important similarity between the two excerpts is that both authorial voices

are highly engaged dialogically Both texts that is use strategies of attributions(eg argument stating proposes ) and hypothetical reasoning to expand dialogicalspace subtly allowing for alternative views and they use pronouncements(clearly obvious certainly ) to contract that space and guide the readers towardtheir own points of view What this heteroglossic engagement suggests is thatboth authors are aware that in academic contexts writers are expected tonegotiate assertions with an imagined reader who is not already aligned withthe authorrsquos point of view but rather ldquois coolly rational reading for information

and intending to formulate a reasoned responserdquo (Taiss amp Zawacki 2006 p7) Furthermore the juxtaposition of perspectives accomplished by alternatingbetween expansive and contractive wordings may be characteristic of academic

writing valued for ldquocriticalrdquo reasoning In her study of the ways experts inanthropology evaluated student writing in a general education course MarySoliday found that readers tended to reward a ldquore1047298ective stancerdquo which involvesa ldquostudentrsquos ability to appreciate diverse positions and then to commit to a

judgment within [that] contextrdquo (2004 p 74)

In the two paragraphs in Table 1 we can see that such appreciation or atleast awareness of diverse positions is subtly infused throughout the texts asthe writers open up dialogical space by acknowledging and entertaining otherpoints of view before committing to a stance For example in the economicsparagraph the direct denial in sentence 4 (not to maximize the health of the

patient ) is followed by an expansively worded elaboration in sentence 5 that works to entertain a concession (If insurance hellip could equate hellip) the dialogicspace is then once contracted in sentence 6 through the use of a counter

(However ) and pronounced denial (clearly is not available )In terms of diff erences the paragraph from economics generally takes amore committed stance It makes use of dialogically contractive options thatthe political theory text avoids namely the strategy of directly disclaiming otherviews (eg However hellip is not upheld by the current situation) It also grounds itspropositions in a more objective voice as seen in the bare assertion in sentence1 and the lack of self-mentions In contrast the excerpt from political theoryuses more expansive options to build its argument particularly the option ofentertaining alternative views which is accomplished not only through the useof attributions and hypothetical reasoning which the economics text makesuse of as well but also conjecturing (I think it is unlikely ) and evidentializing



Lancaster

208

(it seems obvious ) Trough the use of these strategies the student author gentlychallenges Fraserrsquos views rather than directly countering or denying them

One pedagogical question raised by this type of analysis then is whether ornot argumentative writing in economics is more highly valued when it adopts

a direct and committed stance-taking style and whether argumentative writingin political theory is more highly valued when it adopts a less committed styleObviously there is no way to give a generalized answer to this question on thebasis of two studentsrsquo essays We certainly would not want to over-estimate thevalue of committed and direct argumentation in economics especially in lightof the economist Deirdre McCloskeyrsquos suggestion that ldquothe economist looksalways at other possibilities in a world of imagination the opportunity cost thealternatives foregone by the actions in questionrdquo (1998 p 94) or Trine Dahlrsquos

recent 1047297nding that writers of research articles in economics excel at constructingknowledge claims that ldquoachieve the optimal balance of caution modesty andself-promotionrdquo (2009 p 385)

Perhaps then we need to consider the sub-disciplinary contexts For theeconomics paragraph this context is the 1047297eld of economic regulation andantitrust policy and thus the course material (and likely style of argumentation)shunts back and forth between the discourses of economics and law In thisregard the frequent disclaim moves found in the economics paragraph may be

more characteristic of the ldquolawyerlyrdquo rhetoric identi1047297ed by McCloskey in theeconomist Robert Coasersquos discourse (McCloskey 2009 p 90) Furthermoreon a personalidiosyncratic level we might consider the fact that the graduatestudent instructor (GSI) who graded the papers in the course was pursuing a

joint PhD in law and economics and that as stated in an interview he valuedexplicit counter-argumentation

Likewise it would be unfair to conclude that the dialogically expansive styleevident in the political theory paragraph represents a political scientistrsquos mode

of argumentationT

e particular context is political theory and the professorof the course who was trained in philosophy remarked in an interview that the writing assignments in his courses tended to be more ldquohumanities orientedrdquothan social science At the same time however another possible understandingof this paragraph one suggesting a more ldquoidiosyncraticrdquo stylistic reading is thatthe dialogical positioning in the paragraph is too complex and thus the writermisses an opportunity to align the reader with hisher own point of view Inparticular it seems that the writer could have wrapped-up the paragraph witha more contractive move rather than ending with the hypothetical examples

Yet another reading one which rings with the skillful use of dialogicallycontractive language that appears in the conclusion of this paper is that the

writer is trying out a ldquovoicerdquo perceived to be appropriate for a political theory



209


discussion in which critical argumentation should not be carried out in a heavyhanded manner but through the careful juxtaposition of various positions andevaluation of them with respect to one another

CONCLUDING REMARKS

In this chapter I have discussed ways that SFL-based genreregister theoryand Appraisal theory can guide the textual dimensions of genre analysis projectsin the context of college writing instruction Trough the type of systematicattention to the interpersonal dimensions of texts that I have illustrated in thischapter students and instructors can trouble some of the hard and fast stylistic

principles that many students bring with them to their FYC courses principlessuch as ldquobe assertive use active verbs be clear and concise eliminate lsquo1047297llerrsquo

words avoid repetitionrdquo and so on What I would like to suggest then isthat my discussion of texts in this chapter can serve as a model for the typesof discussions that can take place in the context of FYC instruction that isfocused on analyzing classroom genres across the curriculum What drives mydiscussion is the general question of what sorts of interpretations can be madeabout 1047297ne-grained language choices in academic writing What enables me to

have this discussion is a concrete analytic framework and robust meta-languagefor talking about linguistic choices as they are related to meaning in this caseinterpersonal interaction and dialogical stance-taking

Use of an analytic framework allows students to adopt a critical distancefrom the texts they are analyzing In this way it can facilitate the process ofobserving and tracking recurring patterns of language use that are otherwisedifficult to notice from more casual scanning Research from English forSpeci1047297c Purposes contexts shows that students equipped with concrete analytic

constructs for analyzing texts are better able to engage in re1047298

ection on their ownrhetorical choices Cheng for example discusses the gains graduate studentsmade when re1047298ecting on their rhetorical ldquomovesrdquo and ldquostepsrdquo when writingresearch article introductions (after John Swalesrsquo CARS model) Chengrsquos mainargument is that in order to recontextualize discursiverhetorical strategies fromone genre to another novice academic writers need a set of concrete analyticconstructs that allows them to notice recurring patterns in the texts they readand then articulate their meta-re1047298ections about their own use of such patternsTis process of noticing and re1047298ective articulation can support a rhetoricallysensitive transfer of genre features as students learn to use generic features ldquowitha keen awareness of the rhetorical context that facilitates its appropriate userdquo(Cheng 2007 p 303) Tis argument makes sense when we consider that



Lancaster

210

in order to engage in meta-re1047298ection about writing strategies and discursivechoices especially very 1047297ne-grained strategies and choices learners need aspeci1047297c language of re1047298ection

In short I have argued in this paper for particular conceptual and

methodological tools of text analysis with the goal of enabling students toconduct genre analysis with control and authority Te larger goal of enablingstudents to do close text-based genre analysis however is to help them to fostersensitivity to the relations between textual forms and rhetorical eff ects as theylearn to write in various and complex rhetorical situations As Devitt et al putit the idea is to ldquoteach students how to gain knowledge of scenes and genresand how to use that knowledge to make more critically informed and eff ective

writing decisions within various scenesrdquo (2004 p xvii) Tis knowledge and

sensitivity can be the driving force behind the transfer from successfullyanalyzing to successfully writing genres a process whereby students come toread as writers and to write as readers

REFERENCES

Barton E amp Stygall G (Eds) (2002) Discourse studies in composition

Cresskill NJ Hampton PressBawarshi A amp Reiff M J (2010) Genre An introduction to history

theory research and pedagogy West Lafayette IN Parlor Press and the WAC Clearinghouse Retrieved from httpwaccolostateedubooksbawarshi_reiff

Beaufort A (2007) College writing and beyond A new framework for universitywriting instruction Logan Utah State

de Beaugrande R amp Dressler W (1981) Introduction to text linguistics Lon-

don LongmanCarter M (2007) Ways of knowing doing and writing in the disciplines Col-lege Composition and Communication 58 (3) 385-418

Cheng A (2007) Transferring generic features and recontextualizing genreawareness Understanding writing performance in the esp genre-based lit-eracy framework English for Specific Purposes 26 287-307

Christie F amp Derewianka B (2008) School discourse London and New YorkContinuum

Coffin C (2002) Te voices of history Teorizing the interpersonal semanticsof historical discourses Text 22 (4) 503-528

Cohen J amp Rogers J (1991) Knowledge morality and hope Te socialthought of noam chomsky New Left Review 187 5-27



211


Dahl T (2009) Te linguistic representation of rhetorical function A studyof how economists present their knowledge claims Written Communication

26 370-391Derewianka B (2009) Using appraisal theory to track interpersonal devel-

opment in adolescent academic writing In A McCabe M OrsquoDonnell ampR Whittaker R (Eds) Advances in language and education (pp 142-165)New York and London Continuum

Devitt A J (2004) Writing genres Carbondale Southern Illinois UniversityPress

Devitt A J (2009) Refusing form in genre study In Giltrow J amp Stein D(Eds) Genres in the Internet Issues in the theory of genre (pp 27-46) Amster-dam NLD John Benjamins

Devitt A J Bawarshi A amp Reiff M J (2003) Materiality and genre in thestudy of discourse communities College English 65 (5) 541-558

Devitt A J Bawarshi A amp Mary Jo Reiff M J (2004) Scenes of writingStrategies for composing with genres New York Pearson Longman

Halliday M A K (1973) Explorations in the functions of language LondonEdward Arnold (Explorations in Language Study Series)

Halliday M A K (1994) An introduction to functional grammar (2nd ed)London Arnold

Halliday M A K amp Hasan R (1976) Cohesion in English London Long-man

Hyland K (2000) Disciplinary discourse Social interactions in academic writ-ing London Longman

Hyon S (1996) Genre in three traditions Implications for ESL TESOLQuarterly 30 (4) 693-722

Johns A M (1997) Text role and context Developing academic literacies New York and Cambridge Cambridge University Press

Johnson T R amp Pace T (2005) Introduction In T R Johnson amp T Pace(Eds) Re 1047297 guring prose style Possibilities for writing pedagogy (pp 1-2) Lo-gan UT Utah State University Press

Kaplan M L Silver N Meizlish D amp Lavaque-Manty D (nd) Usingmetacognition to foster studentsrsquo disciplinary thinking and writing skillsOngoing research study University of Michigan Ann Arbor

Kolln M (2003) Rhetorical grammar Grammatical choices rhetorical e ff ects (4th ed) New York Longman

MacDonald S P (2007) Te erasure of languageCollege Composition andCommunication 58 (4) 585-625

Martin J R (1998) Linguistics and the consumer Te practice of theoryLinguistics and Education 9 (4) 411-448



Lancaster

Martin J R amp Rose D (2007) Working with discourse Meaning beyond theclause (2nd ed) London Continuum

Martin J R amp Rose D (2008) Genre relations Mapping culture LondonEquinox

Martin J R amp White P R (2005) Te language of evaluation Appraisal inEnglish New York Palgrave Macmillan

Micciche L R (2004) Making a case for rhetorical grammar College Composi-tion and Communciation 55 (4) 716-737

McCloskey D (1986) Te rhetoric of economics Madison WI University of Wisconsin Press

North S (2005) Disciplinary variation in the use of theme in undergraduateessays Applied Linguistics 26 (3) 431-452

Schleppegrell M J (2011) Systemic functional linguistics Exploring mean-ing in language In J Gee amp M Handford (Eds) Te Routledge handbook ofdiscourse analysis (pp 21-34) London Routledge

Soliday M (2004) Reading student writing with anthropologists Stance and judgment in college writing College Composition and Communication 56172-93

Swales J M (1990) Genre analysis Cambridge Cambridge University PressSwain E (2009) Constructive an a ff ective ldquovoicerdquo in academic discussion writ-

ing In A McCabe M OrsquoDonnell amp R Whittaker (Eds) Advances in language and education (pp 166-184) New York and London Continuum

Tang R (2009) A dialogic account of authority in academic writing In MCharles D Pecorari amp S Hunston (Eds) Academic writing At the interfaceof corpus and discourse (pp 170-190) New York and London Continuum

Taiss C amp Zawacki T M (2006) Engaged writers dynamic disciplines Re-search on the academic writing life Portsmouth NH BoyntonCook

Williams J (1997) Style Ten lessons in clarity and grace New York Addison

Wesley Wu S M (2007) Te use of engagement resources in high- and low-ratedundergraduate geography essays Journal of English for Academic Purposes 6 254-271



Lancaster

192

As suggested by the focus on language and text in the above explanationundertaking genre analysis in FYC has the potential to place stylistic analysisback on compositionrsquos center stage in a theoretically-grounded manner enablinginstructors and students to track textual patterns in a way that is sensitive to

contextual dynamics Nevertheless Irsquod like to suggest in this chapter that theapproach has not been as fully operationalized for the classroom as it could beif the textual aspects of genre analysis were considered with more systematicattention to language use As Devitt notes (ldquoRefusingrdquo) RGS has largelydistanced itself from matters of form and so the ldquosmaller bits of languagerdquoreferred to above have not been foregrounded in published genre analyses norhave speci1047297c analytic constructs that students and instructors can use to guidethe process of noticing these bits of language connecting them to other bits

of language and discerning their socio-rhetorical purposes in samples of genreunder analysis My argument in this chapter is that systematic approaches totext analysis are necessary if writing instructors are to support studentsrsquo analysesof genre in ways that help them to identify subtle patterns of text that connectto context Starting from this initial position Irsquod like to suggest that genre-register theory in systemic functional linguistics or SFL can off er one veryuseful way to get started connecting genre as an abstract concept to the nuts andbolts of analyzing genre samples systematically and in detail

SFL is a theory of language developed from the work of the linguist MichaelHalliday (see eg ldquoExplorationsrdquo ldquoAn Introductionrdquo) that explores how ourchoices in language re1047298ect and work to realize key contextual variables that arealways at play in situations where language is used Tese are the 1047297eld (the topicof the text the nature of the social action) the tenor (the relationship betweenparticipants ie writer and reader) and the mode (the part that language playsand what the participants expect the language to do for them in the situation)

According to this theory stylistic qualities of a given text are constructed through

patterns of language choices that are motivated by the1047297

eld tenor and modeFor example as Jonathan Buehlrsquos chapter (this volume) helps us to understandscience discourse is the way that it is (lexically dense and highly nominalized)because the discourse has evolved over time to accommodate the expression ofnew kinds of knowledge (1047297eld) and interpersonal relationships (tenor)

Williamsrsquo lessons in Style Ten Lessons in Clarity and Grace draw liberallyfrom Hallidayrsquos meaning-based grammar and from Halliday and Hasanrsquos workon textual cohesion Building on this earlier work in SFL James R Martin andDavid Rose among others have recently developed a set of discourse-based toolsfor ldquotackling a textrdquo (Martin amp Rose 2007) and these tools enable analysts toexplore how meanings (ideational interpersonal and textual) are constructedin discourse Because these analytic tools do not assume prior knowledge of



193














Lancaster

194








Used





195




RHETORICAL GRAMMAR










Lancaster

196










197











GENRE




Lancaster

198





R EGISTER







199
















Lancaster

200











201












Lancaster

202



















203















Lancaster

204












205












the speci1047297






Lancaster

206










207













Lancaster

208









of argumentationT






209



CONCLUDING REMARKS










Lancaster

210






REFERENCES













211






















Lancaster

















193














Lancaster

194








Used





195




RHETORICAL GRAMMAR










Lancaster

196










197











GENRE




Lancaster

198





R EGISTER







199
















Lancaster

200











201












Lancaster

202



















203















Lancaster

204












205












the speci1047297






Lancaster

206










207













Lancaster

208









of argumentationT






209



CONCLUDING REMARKS










Lancaster

210






REFERENCES













211






















Lancaster

















Lancaster

194








Used





195




RHETORICAL GRAMMAR










Lancaster

196










197











GENRE




Lancaster

198





R EGISTER







199
















Lancaster

200











201












Lancaster

202



















203















Lancaster

204












205












the speci1047297






Lancaster

206










207













Lancaster

208









of argumentationT






209



CONCLUDING REMARKS










Lancaster

210






REFERENCES













211






















Lancaster

















195




RHETORICAL GRAMMAR










Lancaster

196










197











GENRE




Lancaster

198





R EGISTER







199
















Lancaster

200











201












Lancaster

202



















203















Lancaster

204












205












the speci1047297






Lancaster

206










207













Lancaster

208









of argumentationT






209



CONCLUDING REMARKS










Lancaster

210






REFERENCES













211






















Lancaster

















Lancaster

196










197











GENRE




Lancaster

198





R EGISTER







199
















Lancaster

200











201












Lancaster

202



















203















Lancaster

204












205












the speci1047297






Lancaster

206










207













Lancaster

208









of argumentationT






209



CONCLUDING REMARKS










Lancaster

210






REFERENCES













211






















Lancaster

















197











GENRE




Lancaster

198





R EGISTER







199
















Lancaster

200











201












Lancaster

202



















203















Lancaster

204












205












the speci1047297






Lancaster

206










207













Lancaster

208









of argumentationT






209



CONCLUDING REMARKS










Lancaster

210






REFERENCES













211






















Lancaster

















Lancaster

198





R EGISTER







199
















Lancaster

200











201












Lancaster

202



















203















Lancaster

204












205












the speci1047297






Lancaster

206










207













Lancaster

208









of argumentationT






209



CONCLUDING REMARKS










Lancaster

210






REFERENCES













211






















Lancaster

















199
















Lancaster

200











201












Lancaster

202



















203















Lancaster

204












205












the speci1047297






Lancaster

206










207













Lancaster

208









of argumentationT






209



CONCLUDING REMARKS










Lancaster

210






REFERENCES













211






















Lancaster

















Lancaster

200











201












Lancaster

202



















203















Lancaster

204












205












the speci1047297






Lancaster

206










207













Lancaster

208









of argumentationT






209



CONCLUDING REMARKS










Lancaster

210






REFERENCES













211






















Lancaster

















201












Lancaster

202



















203















Lancaster

204












205












the speci1047297






Lancaster

206










207













Lancaster

208









of argumentationT






209



CONCLUDING REMARKS










Lancaster

210






REFERENCES













211






















Lancaster

















Lancaster

202



















203















Lancaster

204












205












the speci1047297






Lancaster

206










207













Lancaster

208









of argumentationT






209



CONCLUDING REMARKS










Lancaster

210






REFERENCES













211






















Lancaster

















203















Lancaster

204












205












the speci1047297






Lancaster

206










207













Lancaster

208









of argumentationT






209



CONCLUDING REMARKS










Lancaster

210






REFERENCES













211






















Lancaster

















Lancaster

204












205












the speci1047297






Lancaster

206










207













Lancaster

208









of argumentationT






209



CONCLUDING REMARKS










Lancaster

210






REFERENCES













211






















Lancaster

















205












the speci1047297






Lancaster

206










207













Lancaster

208









of argumentationT






209



CONCLUDING REMARKS










Lancaster

210






REFERENCES













211






















Lancaster

















Lancaster

206










207













Lancaster

208









of argumentationT






209



CONCLUDING REMARKS










Lancaster

210






REFERENCES













211






















Lancaster

















207













Lancaster

208









of argumentationT






209



CONCLUDING REMARKS










Lancaster

210






REFERENCES













211






















Lancaster

















Lancaster

208









of argumentationT






209



CONCLUDING REMARKS










Lancaster

210






REFERENCES













211






















Lancaster

















209



CONCLUDING REMARKS










Lancaster

210






REFERENCES













211






















Lancaster

















Lancaster

210






REFERENCES













211






















Lancaster

















211






















Lancaster

















Lancaster















chapter11 interpersonal meaning written

Documents