evaluative semantics and ideological positioning in journalistic discourse – a new framework for...

8/12/2019 Evaluative semantics and ideological positioning in journalistic discourse a new framework for analysis

1/25

Evaluative semantics and ideologicalpositioning in journalistic discourse anew framework for analysis

(White, P.R.R., 2006, Evaluative semantics and ideological positioning in journalisticdiscourse a ne !rameor" !or anal#sis$, inMediating Ideology in Text and Image:ten critical studies, %assen, &. (ed.', ohn )enjamins, *msterdam+ - 6/ '

Introduction& ta"e as m# starting point !or this paper the vie that, contrar# to an# claims toojectivit#$ on the part o! the media industr#, nes reporting is a mode o! rhetoric inthe roadest sense o! the ord a value laden, ideologicall# determined discourseith a clear potential to in!luence the media audience$s assumptions and elie!s aoutthe a# the orld is and the a# it ought to e. 1his rhetorical and ultimatel#

ideological potential has no een so idel# demonstrated in the literature that ithardl# needs to e argued !or. (ee, !or e3ample, 1re 4/-/, 5artle# 4/2, 7airclough4/, )ird 8 9ardenne 4/, 5erman 8 :homs"# 4/, 7is" 4//, 7oler 4//4,Ericson 8 )arane" 4//4, Parenti 4//, Eldridge 4//, &edema, 7ee; 8White 4//


2/25

appraisal !rameor"', values # hich the intensit# or !orce o! propositions is raisedor loered (termed graduation$' and values # hich the spea"er@riter engages iththe other voices and alternative value positions in pla# in the current communicativeconte3t (termed engagement$'. (7or a !ull account see ?artin 8 White in press.'

?ore speci!icall#, the !rameor" hich & propose !or the anal#sis o! evaluation innes reporting te3ts oserves the !olloing options and possiilities !or variation inthe mechanisms # hich attitudinal positions can e conve#ed and # hich thereader can e positioned to !avour or dis!avour a particular viepoint.

1. Affect, Judgement and Appreciation types of Attitude.Positive and negative evaluations can e divided into those hich involve (a'emotional reactions (hat the appraisal !rameor" terms a!!ect$', ('assessments o! human ehaviour and character # re!erence to some s#stemo! conventionalised or institutionalised norms (hat the appraisal !rameor"terms judgement$' and (c' assessments o! arte!acts, te3ts, natural ojects,states o! a!!airs and processes in terms o! ho the# are assigned value

sociall#, !or e3ample in terms o! their aesthetic >ualities, their potential !orharm or ene!it, their social signi!icance, and so on. 7or e3ample (relevantitems are underlined'+

(a!!ect emotional reaction'It was, then, withfury, that I returned home onSaturday to find my own country rumbling with the mumbles of the

peaceniks.

(judgement normative assessment o! human ehaviour' To see policebrutallymanhandlingdemonstrators was not only shocking but

representative of more repressiveregimes, such as hina.

(appreciation assigning a social value to ojects, arte!acts, te3ts, states o!a!!airs' The new president!s speech was elegantandwell-woven, sounding a

panoply of themes without seeming scattered.

2. Attitudinal inscription versus attitudinal tokens.1his distinction attends to the possiilit# that attitudinal evaluations ma# emore or less e3plicitl# articulated. 1he lael attitudinal inscription$ appliesto the use o! locutions hich carr# an attitudinal value (positive or negativeassessment' hich is largel# !i3ed and stale across a ide range o! conte3ts.7or e3ample, via le3ical items such as corrupt, virtuously, skilfully, tyrant,coward, beautiful, abused, brutalised. 1he contrastive term attitudinal

to"en$ is applied to !ormulations here there is no single item hich, o!itsel! and independentl# o! its current cote3t, carries a speci!ic positive ornegative value. Rather, the positive@negative viepoint is activated viavarious mechanisms o! association and implication. &n such cases theevaluative position is triggered$ or eto"ened$ rather than eing e3plicitl#inscried$.

3. Attitudinal tokens: evoking versus provoking.

Within !ormulations hich articulate the attitudinal position less e3plicitl#(to"ens', it is possile to distinguish eteen those hich contain noevaluative le3is o! an# t#pe and those hich contain evaluative material utnot o! an e3plicitl# positive@negative t#pe. &n the !irst instance, the positive

p. 2


3/25

or negative assessment is evo"ed$ via purel# e3periential (!actual$' materialhich, as a result o! eing selected and rought into !ocus ithin the te3t,has the potential to trigger a positive or negative reaction in the reader via

processes o! attitudinal in!erence. &n the second instance, the positive ornegative assessment is provo"ed$ via material hich, hile evaluative, is

not o! itsel! positive or negative !or e3ample, via intensi!ication,comparison, metaphor or countere3pectation. 7or e3ample,

(evocation triggering positive@negative responses # means o! a !ocus onpurel# in!ormational content' "eorge #. $ush delivered his inauguralspeech as the %nited States &resident who collected '(),*** fewer votes

than his opponent.

(provocation triggering positive@negative responses # means o!!ormulations hich are in other a#s evaluative' Telstra has withdrawn

sponsorship of a suicide prevention phone service +just days after

announcing a -.( billion half+yearly profit.(5ere/ust days afterconstrues

surprise on the part o! the journalist author the action # 1elstra,*ustralia$s, primar#, governmentcontrolled telecommunications provider, isassessed as une3pected, or at least as coming sooner than ould e e3pected.1he !ormulation thus has the potential to provo"es$ in the reader a negativeassessment o! 1elstra$s actions.'

4. Agency and Affectedness.

*s has alread# een idel# demonstrated in the literature, in certain t#pes o!nes report, choices ith respect to hich participants are represented asagentive and hich as a!!ected@actedupon o!ten have a potential to in!luenceho is to e seen as more to lame and ho as less to lame. 5ere e are

dealing ith grammatical choices as to hich participants in the reportedevent are t#picall# assigned an active or agentive role in the clause (!ore3ample as the uject o! active voice clauses, especiall# here the veral

process is a material one' and hich participants are t#picall# assigned to anactedupon or a!!ected role in the clause (!or e3ample, as the Aject o! anactive material process clause, or the uject o! a passive voice clause.'. *numer o! in!luential anal#ses (i.e. 1re 4/-/, :lar" 4//2' havedemonstrated that the degree o! lameorthiness hich is li"el# to attach toa given participant can e conditioned # the degree to hich the# arerepresented as pla#ing an active, agentive role. 1hus 1re in his highl#in!luential anal#sis o! nespaper coverage o! a disturance in %ondon$s

Botting 5ill in the 4/-0s shoed that coverage o! the event # onenespaper indirectl# positioned the reader to lame the socalled rioters$ #

presenting them as agent$ in a high proportion o! the clauses, hile, incontrast, another nespaper positioned the reader to vie the police as moreto lame # presenting them as the primar# agents and the memers o! thecrod as actedupon. (1re 4/-/'.

5. Attriution.

&t is an ovious !eature o! journalistic discourse, especiall# nes reporting,that journalistic authors t#picall# disassociated themselves !rom evaluativemeanings, especiall# the more e3plicit ones, # attriuting them to e3ternal

sources. Bevertheless, there is a range o! mechanisms # hich the

p.


4/25

journalistic author can indirectl# indicate alignment ith or disalignment!rom the e3ternalised$ value position and # hich the reader ma# e

positioned to regard that position as more or as less arrantale.

&n hat !ollos, m# primar# !ocus ill e upon headings 2 through = aove evaluative positioning hich is achieved via mechanisms hich are in some a# lessthan !ull# e3plicit or in other a#s indirect. 1hese mechanisms are o! particularimportance !or the anal#sis o! those te3ts hich operate ith hat can e termed astrateg# o! partial impersonalisation those hard nes$ items here the use o!evaluative meanings is to some degree constrained, especiall# the use o! overtl#

positive and negative assessments on the part o! the journalist author. (7or a !ulleraccount o! this hard nes$ register, see &edema, 7ee; and White 4//


5/25

remedies !or latantl# un!air ehaviour # emplo#ers. IThe Times, )an" o!English sucorpusJ

& ill return in a later section to such attriution and to e3ploring ho the reader ma#e positioned # the te3t to ta"e a !avourale or un!avourale vie o! the reportedvalue position. 7or the moment, hoever, m# !ocus is upon evaluative material !orhich the journalist ta"es direct responsiilit#, and especiall# upon those !ormulationshich do not emplo# such overtl# and !i3edl# attitudinal locutions ut hich, togreater or lesser degrees, rel# on more indirect evaluative mechanisms such as thoseo! attitudinal association and in!erence.

Hard news and e!plicit attitudinal inscription1he !olloing to nes report e3tracts demonstrate a numer o! the "e# mechanismso! attitudinal positioning oth the more e3plicit and the less e3plicit as these o!tenoperate in roadsheet$ hard nes reporting. )oth e3tracts are ta"en !rom reports o! ademonstration protesting against )ritish involvement in the air raids hich ere

eing mounted against &ra> at that time # the H and )ritish air !orces. 1his as in4///, several #ears e!ore the all out assault on &ra> # the H and its allies in 200.

!e"t 1. #The Times$

%ullets &reck %lair 'isit

7AHR people ere ounded in a gun!ight eteen ?uslim e3tremists andpolice aout 400 #ards !rom 1on# )lair in :ape 1on #esterda# a!tero!!icers spotted men handing out guns to demonstrators a#ing !or the Prime?inisters lood.?r )lairs convo# o! cars had een held up # the demonstration organised

# a group calling itsel! ?uslims *gainst Cloal Appression, and he assmuggled in through a side entrance o! the :astle moments e!ore shooting

ro"e out.1he police said that the# had seen to men distriuting arms to protestersho held up placards condemning the )ritish and *merican airstri"es against&ra> and sa#ing F9eath to )lairF, FAne )lair, one ulletF, and F%ong live5amasF.1he o!!icers said that the# gave the crod !ive minutes to disperse e!ore!iring teargas and throing stun grenades at the demonstrators. 1he# thenopened !ire a!ter eing shot at themselves.

KcontinuesLM IThe Times, /@4@//J

!e"t 2. #The Guardian$

(out) African police open fire on anti*%lair protesters

1he crac" o! shotguns as heard in the streets o! outh *!ricasparliamentar# capital #esterda# as police opened !ire on ?uslimsdemonstrating against a visit # 1on# )lair.*t least three people ere injured ith rounds o! irdshot, including a local

journalist, as police resorted to strongarm tactics to rea" up the protestoutside :ape 1ons castle. 1he )ritish prime minister, accompanied # hisi!e :herie, as attending an aards ceremon# involving )ritish militar#advisors in the 4-th :entur# !ort.Police also used ruer ullets, stungrenades and teargas to disperse aout

4=0 demonstrators, man# o! them omen. 1he# ere randishing

p. =


6/25

threatening placards Fone ullet, one )lairF, Fdeath to 1on# )lairF protesting against )ritains role in the recent air stri"es against &ra>.A!!icers at the scene said police had come under !ire, ut there as nocon!irmation o! this.ecurit# as tight !or the visit, coming as it does a!ter last ee"s pipe om

e3plosion at the Nictoria and *lert Water!ront shopping centre, :ape 1onspremier tourist attraction.

Police used apartheidera securit# las to control access to the cit#s airport!or the prime ministers arrival in :ape 1on on the third and last da# o! his!irst o!!icial visit to outh *!rica. KcontinuesLM I"uardian %nlimited@4@//J

1he to te3ts are stri"ingl# dissimilar in the evaluative position the# advance ithrespect to the police and the protestors, ith 1e3t 4 (The Times' strongl# positioningthe reader to ta"e a negative vie o! the protestors and to s#mpathise ith the police,and 1e3t 2 5The "uardian', in contrast, advancing a somehat negative vie o! the

police and a signi!icantl# less negative vie o! the protestors.1hese evaluative e!!ects are partl# the result o! the use o! attitudinal inscriptions locutions hich have a consistent attitudinal value across a iderange o! conte3ts.1hus the Timesreport negativel# evaluates the demonstrators as extremists, a term #hich the ehaviour o! individuals and groups is e3plicitl# characterised as e#ondthe ounds o! the sociall# acceptale. 1his negative meaning as shon to e highl#stale across the uentl# associated ith allegations that groups or individuals have een involved

in nonstate sanctioned acts o! political violence. 1he "uardianis similarl# e3plicitl#evaluative in its use o! the termstrong+arm tacticsto negativel# characterise theconduct o! the police. 1his is a term hich, again, has a largel# !i3ed evaluativemeaning across conte3ts, indicating that conduct has een assessed as involvinge3cessive !orce or aggression, or some other ause o! poer. *ll ut !ive o! the /=instances o! the phrase in the )an" o! English carried this negative evaluation. 1heonl# e3ceptions ere here the term as used literall# to descrie a particular a# o!casting ith a !ishing rod or in te3ts relating to sporting activities. 7or e3ample,

trongarm tactics and some !ine goal"eeping prevailed last night as amuscular )ur# side rushed aside the more sutle approach o! :olin 1oddsPremiership aspirants.

:ruciall#, oth te3t e3tracts contain just the one instance o! an e3plicitl# attitudinalinscription, ith a signi!icant part o! the evaluative load eing carried # other moreindirect mechanisms.

"ttitudinal tokens # evoking positive$negativeassessments via informational content&n oth te3t e3tracts, there is content o! an apparentl# purel# in!ormational ore3periential nature hich has a clear potential to trigger attitudinal assessments. &nte3t 4, !or e3ample, the violence is said to have occurred as police opened fire afterbeing shot at themselves. 1his is !actual$ content hich can !orm the asis !or a

justi!ication o! the police actions and condemnation o! those the# are presented as

p. 6


7/25

de!ending themselves against. 1his evaluative e!!ect depends, o! course, on the readerholding to a s#stem o! values # hich (a' it is rong to !ire at police and (' it isacceptale !or police to retaliate in this a# i! !ired upon. &n the event that suchconditions otain, then this proposition has the potential to evo"e$ in the reader a

positive vie o! the police and a negative vie o! the demonstrators.

omehat similar is the earlier characterisation o! the incident as agunfighthichtoo" place eteen the demonstrators and the police about 6** yards from Tony $lair.)# the use o! this termgunfight,the riter suggests some e3tended and concertedaction on the part o! the demonstrators in !ighting$ ith the police, even hile theriter re!rains !rom overtl# descriing the action in these terms. Ance again this isin!ormational content ith a potential to evo"e a negative response !rom readers. 1his

potential is enhanced # the riter raising the possiilit# that the reader$s on Prime?inister (since the te3t as directed toards a )ritish readership' as put at ris" dueto his close pro3imit# to the gun!ight$.

1hese speci!ic depictions are supported # a more generalised representational

tendenc# under hich, across the te3t as a hole, it is the demonstrators rather thanthe police ho are more o!ten placed in the active, agent role. 1hus the# are construedas initiators o! action and hence as participants ho, at least potentiall#, areresponsile !or the events hich transpired. 1he e3tract cited aove displa#s the sametendenc# as the te3t as a hole in this regard. 1here e oserve that thedemonstrators or those associated ith them are presented as the initiators o! materialactions on si3 occasions,

men IereJ handing out guns to demonstratorsdemonstrators IereJ a#ing !or the Prime ?inisters lood.?r )lairs convo# o! cars had een held up # the demonstration

the demonstration IasJ organised # a group calling itsel! ?uslims *gainstCloal Appression,to men IereJ distriuting arms to protesters

protestors ho held up placards condemning the )ritish and *mericanairstri"es against &ra>

hile the police are agents in material actions on onl# three occasions

IpoliceJ !iring teargas and IpoliceJ throing stun grenades at thedemonstrators

1he# then opened !ire a!ter eing shot at themselves

1his te3tide tendenc# provides support !or the other meanings in the te3t hichmore speci!icall# position the reader to see the demonstrators as the activetransgressors and the police as the more passive participant ho are compelled to ta"eaction in order to de!end themselves and to maintain order.

1he representational disposition o! the "uardiante3t or"s toards the oppositeevaluative e!!ect. 1here the police are presented as having opened fire on Muslimsdemonstrating against a visit by Tony $lairin order to rea" up the protest. *s anattitudinal to"en, this is more open than the assertion # the Timesjournalist that thereere protestors engaged in a gun!ight ith police. &t is certainl# availale to thereader to interpret this as indicating rong doing on the part o! the police another

instance o! police rutalit# in a place ith a histor# o! police rutalit# (though

p. -


8/25

admittedl# that rutalit# as under the !ormer *partheid regime.'. )ut it is alsoavailale to the reader to reserve judgement until, presumal#, the remainder o! thereport provides !urther in!ormation hich ma# justi!# such actions. 1ellingl#, it is atthis point that the riter ma"es his one overtl# attitudinal intervention into the te3t tonegativel# characterise the police conduct asstrong arm tactics, there# sustantiall#

limiting the scope o! an# attitudinal amiguit#. 1he positioning o! the reader to ta"e anegative vie o! the police is !urther developed hen the riter intervenes again tooserve that there has een no con!irmation o! the police assertion that the# cameunder !ire themselves. &n terms o! usual journalistic practice, this is highl# mar"ed inthat it is unusual !or journalistic authors to suggest that statements # police are in an#a# re>uiring o! validation or to report on an# such e!!orts, success!ul or not, atvalidation. 1hus the !act$ that there has een no con!irmation o! the police claim hasthe potential to evo"e an assessment under hich the police are vieed as unrelialeand the assertion as li"el# to e untrue.

1he antipolice line is !urther supported # the characterisation o! the regulations

under hich the# have een acting as apartheid+era security laws. While this is,strictl# spea"ing, onl# !actual in!ormation$ and hence onl# a to"en$ o! attitude (theseindeed are the same statutes hich applied under the !ormer government', this isnevertheless content hich has the potential to evo"e negativit# toards the police astheir conduct is connected ith that o! the notoriousl# oppressive !ormer regime.

Ance again, there are te3tide tendencies in transitivit# choices hich support theevaluative disposition estalished # these more speci!icall# evaluativerepresentations and assessments. *lmost e3actl# reversing the arrangement in theTimesreport, here it is the police, rather than the protestors, ho are construed asagentive and hence as the primar# initiators o! this violence. 1hus the police areagents o! material actions on occasions,

outh *!rican police open !ire on anti)lair protestersL as police opened !ire on ?uslims

police resorted to strongarm tacticsIpoliceJ to rea" up the protest outside :ape 1ons castle.Police also used ruer ullets, stungrenades and teargasIpoliceJ to disperse aout 4=0 demonstrators, man# o! them omen.

Police used apartheidera securit# las

IpoliceJ to control access to the cit#s airport

hile the demonstrators are agents o! material process clauses on onl# to occasions

?uslims demonstrating against a visit # 1on# )lair.

1he# ere randishing threatening placards

)# this discussion, then, e have seen that it is not onl# individual in!ormationalpropositions hich have the potential to dispose the reader toards a particularattitudinal assessment ut also te3tide tendencies ith respect to agenc# anda!!ectedness. 1he discussion has also demonstrated ho it is that such essentiall#!actual$ attitudinal to"ens ma# interact ith, and have their attitudinal valuesstailised #, an# e3plicitl# attitudinal inscriptions hich ma# e present. &t isnoteorth# that, hile there as onl# the one e3plicitl# attitudinal inscription in the

p.


9/25

"uardian e3tract, it pla#ed a crucial role in estalishing the terms # hich thepotentiall# more open attitudinal to"ens ere to e interpreted.

"ttitudinal tokens % evaluative positioning viaassociation and provocation

1o this point, then, & covered evaluative mechanisms hich !all at the oppositee3tremes o! attitudinal e3plicitness@implicitness. *t the e3plicit e3treme areinscriptions (i.e. extremistandstrong+arm tactics' hichare recognisale as overtannouncements o! the author$s on value position. *t the opposite implicit e3tremeare !actual to"ens (i.e. 7fficers at the scene said police had come under fire, but therewas no confirmation of this.' here the riter presents in!ormational content hich,o! itsel! and i! considered out o! conte3t, is t#picall# open as to the evaluativeconclusions it gives rise to. Creater or lesser degrees o! involvement are re>uired o!the reader as, according to the values and elie!s the# ring to the te3t, the# respondevaluativel# to that content, one a# or another.

5oever, as indicated in the introductor# section, there are additional optionsavailale !or evaluative positioning hich !all eteen these to e3tremes. 5ere & amconcerned, !irstl#, ith locutions hich, though !re>uentl# associated ith approvalor disapproval on the part o! the spea"er@riter, are less stale across conte3ts in theattitudinal value the# carr# than more stale terms such as extremist, disgraceful,

sham, andstrong+arm tactics. *nd, secondl#, & am concerned ith hat & previousl#termed attitudinal provocations$ !ormulations here the author$s sujective

presence is clearl# made salient in some a#, ith this sujectivit# capale o! eingseen as directing the reader toards a particular attitudinal assessment, ut here,nevertheless, there are no terms hich, o! themselves, carr# a positive or negativevalue. & ill consider each o! these possiilities in turn, and in order to do so it is

necessar# to introduce an additional te3t e3tract. 1his is the opening !e sentences o!a report on the protest associated ith an o!!icial visit to the Hnited Oingdom # the:hinese head o! state, iang Demin, in Actoer 4///.

+"tract 3 The 8aily Telegraph

Anti*)ina protests rus)ed aside

1he !irst :hinese state visit in )ritish histor# egan #esterda# ith a lone,1iananmen >uarest#le attempt to disrupt the ro#al procession in the ?alland muted protests elsehere.

*s the ueen and President iang Demin travelled to )uc"ingham Palace, a< #earoldman jumped over the arriers and attempted to un!url the 1ietan

!lag in !ront o! their coach& have chosen this e3tract on account o! the !act that, hile it emplo#s no e3plicitattitudinal inscriptions, it does position the reader attitudinall# through (a' theprovocation$ o! lone, Tiananmen S9uare+styleand through (' the negativeassociations o! brush asideand disrupt.

Attitudinal provocation

&n lone, Tiananmen S9uare+stylee oserve an instance o! attitudinal provocation viaanalog# or metaphor. 1he author$s sujective presence is made more salient as the#intervene in the te3t to assert this li"eness or similarit#. *lthough the# re!rain !romovertl# characterising the protestor as courageous$ or determined$, the# nevertheless

p. /


10/25

indicate a positive disposition toards the protestor, at least !or those readers ith a"noledge o! the 1iananmen >uare protest and the a# in hich the Western mediaso consistentl# presented this as a heroic struggle # ordinar# !reedomloving peopleagainst the totalitarian might o! the :hinese government. 1he addition o! lonehere is

particularl# instrumental in this respect, recalling as it does the memorale image o!

the solitar# demonstrator loc"ing the progress o! a tan" hich as so idel#reproduced in Western nes coverage o! the event. *s a to"en$ rather than aninscription$ o! attitude, the term, o! course, still leaves the attitudinal positioningsomehat open. *s a to"en, it relies on sociall# and culturall# conditionedconnections and in!erences on the part o! the reader, and here readers are not sujectto that conditioning or consciousl# reject it, then these in!erences ill not e activatedand an alternative reading ma# ensue. & note ith interest that, hen & use this te3tith m# undergraduate media studies and linguistics students, there is a signi!icantminorit# ho do not read the e3tract as s#mpathetic toards the protestor. 1hese areusuall# students ho ere under the age o! !ive at the time o! the 1iananmen >uare

protests and ho report little or no "noledge o! the incident. )ut even though, as a

to"en, this !ormulation is open ith respect to the attitudinal orientation eingcultivated, as provo"ed$ rather than evo"ed$ attitude, it still reveals the hand o! theauthor, so to spea", indirectl# manoeuvring the reader toards a particular value

position.

Wor" on the mechanisms o! indirect attitudinal invocation is in its earl# da#s ithinthe appraisal !rameor". )ut alread# it does appear that metaphor and other modes o!analog# are an important source o! meanings oth in the language generall# andithin journalistic discourse. We have alread# oserved another instance o! such ine3tract 4 aove. 1here the anti)lair protestors ere said to e baying for the &rime

Ministers blood. 1his metaphor is oviousl# a highl# salient sujective intervention

in the te3t # the journalist author and #et he has still stopped just short o! usinge3plicit inscription to overtl# condemn the protestors as, !or e3ample, menacing$,vicious$ or evil$.

1he characterisation o! events and stateso!a!!airs as contrar# to e3pectation isanother important mechanism o! attitudinal provocation hich & rie!l# nodemonstrate. :onsider the !olloing to e3tracts. (Ede3el$ is a HO organisationhich administers higher secondar# school e3aminations.'

e3tract


11/25

1he !irst e3tracted (concocted # me on the asis o! e3tract


12/25

uch terms are prolematic !or several reasons. 7irstl# the# clearl# carr# somee3periential (in!ormational content'. 1hus to brush asideand to disruptdo othdepict, ith greater or less degrees o! precision, acts in the material orld.*ccordingl#, as is >uite o!ten the case ith attitudinal terms, especiall# attitudinalvers, such terms simultaneousl# have an e3periential and an interpersonal !unction.

1here are at least some attitudinal terms hich do no have this multi!unctionalit#.7or e3ample, disgracefulin The governments behaviour is disgraceful ma"es nore!erence to a condition or a >ualit# o! the e3periential orld. &ts !unction is a purel#interpersonal one o! conve#ing authorial disapproval. What this means is that, ithterms such as brush asideand disrupt,it is not possile to dra a clear line eteene3periential and attitudinal content, or that e have to ac"noledge that these aree3periential meanings hich come ith relativel# stale attitudinal associations. &noserving this phenomenon & am in somehat similar territor# to those corpuslinguists ho have een or"ing on hat is termed semantic prosod#$ or discourse

prosod#$ (ee !or e3ample, inclair 4//4, %ou 4// and tus 4//6'. 1his or"has demonstrated, !or e3ample, that even such apparentl# neutral$ terms as to cause

andto undergohave strong attitudinal associations and accordingl# ma# activatepositive or negative overtones.

With this in mind, & return to the case o! to disrupt.

1he !irst :hinese state visit in )ritish histor# egan #esterda# ith aInJ Lattempt to disruptthe ro#al procession in the ?allL

*ove & mentioned the use o! this te3t e3tract in m# universit# teaching. *s part o!this teaching, & surve# students on their responses to this and other te3t e3tracts,as"ing them to ran" the e3tracts in terms o! their sujectivit#@ojectivit#$ and tocomment on an# evaluative uses o! language the# can detect. Aver the past !ive #ears

in hich & have een conducting the surve#, there has ala#s een a certain numero! students ho regard this use o! disruptas conve#ing a negative vie o! theprotestor. 1hese are almost ala#s those students ho have minimal or no "noledgeo! the 1iananmen >uare protests and ho, accordingl#, do not read this depiction asindicating support !or the protest on the part o! the author. Aviousl#, reading positionis one !actor in!luencing these readers interpretation. 7or those ho are generall#opposed to interruptions o! ro#al processions e can presume that it on$t matterhether the protestors are descried as disrupting$ the procession or hether moreoviousl# !actual$ !ormulations are used !or e3ample, the protestors attempted to

put themselves in the a# o! the ro#al procession$ or the protestors attempted tointerrupt the progress o! the ro#al procession$. &n this e see the e3periential content

o! the proposition at or". )ut the >uestion remains as to hether # using the termdisrupt$ the riter adds an additional attitudinal element.

:ertainl# the )an" o! English provides evidence o! a strong association eteendisruptand the passing o! negative judgements. 1he majorit# o! instances o! disruptin the )an" o! English operate in such settings. 7or e3ample,

We ant to preserve grammar schools, hich are renoned !or academicresults, sporting proess and cultural achievements. crapping them ould

ring huge council ta3 rises and disrupt the lives o! hundreds o! thousands o!children.

p. 42


13/25

:oincidentall# the arning as made pulic at a time hen securit# chie!shave ordered a ma3imum alert a!ter intelligence reports that the Real &R*intends to tr# to disrupt polling da# in the general election.

*nd certainl# this association can e seen as !i3ed de!initivel# in the e3plicitl#evaluative adjective, disruptive$, t#picall# !ound in such collocations as disruptivein!luence$ and disruptive element$. 7or e3ample (!rom the )an" o! English',

Ltrained the *!ghan ?ujaheddin and recruited tens o! thousands o! #ouths!rom all over the &slamic orld to !ight alongside them. &ndoctrinated in&slamic seminaries, the# later ecame violentl# disruptive elements in theiron countries.

&magine #ou are an emplo#er ho !or #ears has struggled ith a la;#,ine!!icient and disruptive emplo#ee ho has suddenl# een o!!ered a joelsehere on the strength o! a good re!erence !rom #ou.

*nd #et the )an" o! English also reveals that, in a minorit# o! cases, to disruptdoes

not carr# this negative sense or at least in this minorit# o! cases it does not encodecensure on the part o! the spea"er@riter. *uthorial disapproval is not indicated henthe disruption is seen as merited, hen, !or e3ample, the disruption is o! somenegativel# evaluated activit# or state o! a!!airs. 7or e3ample, (!rom the )an" o!English'

*s ?Ps return to Westminster, 9avid )lun"ett, the 5ome ecretar#, andCordon )ron, the :hancellor, ill outline ho the Covernment plans tochange the la to deter and disruptF the or" o! terrorists in )ritain.

everal scouts ma# have een disappointed to learn that ermaine enas, theirpromising #oung mid!ield pla#er, as out injured, ut there as su!!icientresilience and ailit# in their ran"s to disrupt a sluggish )olton, ho restedmost o! the s>uad that has guided them to !i!th place in the 7* )arcla#cardPremiership.

:ruciall# in these cases, the te3t e3plicitl# adopts a negative vie o! those eingdisrupted those disrupted are terroristsand a sluggish $olton.

1his potential !or the deactivation o! a de!ault negativit# (or at least its limitation tothe perspective o! the a!!ected part#' is a propert# hich disruptshares ith a set o!vers hich includes terms such as damage, destro# wreckand harm. 1he )an" o!English reveals that such terms are li"e disruptin that the# are associated ithriter@spea"er disapproval and censure in a large majorit# o! instances. 5oever aninternet search reveals that, li"e disrupt, such terms are still suject to the deactivation(or the limitation' o! their negative association. 1he# need not encode authorialdisapproval. 7or e3ample,

4.(++!A/ 0+:1here has een a lot o! *l aida activit#,hether the overall threat is rising or i! e are seeing a pea" right no andthen it ill recede again, & don$t "no. We have damaged *l aida >uite a

it # hat e did in *!ghanistan.I.state.gov@secretar#@rm@200@20/0/.htmJ

2. &n the a"e o! the &ra> campaign, a ne terrorist ar is under a#, and

)ritain is in danger. Bic" 7ielding reports on our suuran omers L

p. 4


14/25

. 1he !act that another S"indl#T #oung man !rom )ritain$s *sian communit#as ith him, strapped up in an e3plosive suicide pac", is even morechilling. 5as a generation o! &slamic "illers gron up in our midst, madedoul# e!!ective # their )ritish passportsU 1here is a parado3 here. 1he arin &ra> has not triggered the predicted terrorist revenge attac"s in )ritain and

*merica, and, according to Washington, the :&* and H special !orces havee!!ectivel# rec"ed *laeda. Vet the danger !rom !anatical &slamicterrorism seems never to have een so great. IThe Times, =@=@200

uestion o! 9e!ensive hields central goal+5ave e succeeded in harming the terror in!rastructure to an e3tent that illensure a complete cessation, or at least an serious reduction in the scope o!murderous attac"sU IThe =erusalem &ost,46@uired (as aove', or # the reader@listener holdingthis vie o! their on accord. 1his possiilit# leads to several conclusions aout theevaluative mechanisms hich operate ith such terms. 1o descrie some oject, stateor process as disrupted, damagedor wreckedis oviousl# to pass negative judgementon that phenomenon in terms o! its usual composition or condition. 5oever,cruciall#, hat e have here are instances o! hat, ithin appraisal theor#, is anappreciation$. *s indicated earlier, the appraisal !rameor" regards as signi!icant thedistinction hich separates normative assessments o! human ehaviour (judgements'!rom assessments o! the !orm, presentation or appearance o! ojects and processes(appreciations'. *s appreciations$, then, assessments that some oject or process isdisruptedor damagedare not value judgements hich are directl# targeted at humansujects. 1here is no direct normative assessment o! human ehaviour or character.5oever, hen some human agent is depicted as having caused that disrupted,damagedor wreckedstate, then it is usual !or an in!erence to !ollo # hich thisagent is negativel# assessed. &t is usuall# rong$ to disrupt or to damage. 1he !actthat it is, hoever, possile !or this not to appl# and !or some disruptions$ anddamagings$ to e regarded positivel# shos us that this attitudinal connection is not anecessar# one. &t shos us that negative assessment o! the disrupter@damager$ is not a!i3ed attitudinal value carried # disrupt$ or damage$. Rather it is an e!!ect hich isonl# t#picall# rather than universall# associated ith uses o! such terms.

1his case also points us to the need to allo that attitudinal e!!ects ma# e carried, not

# individual ords (as is the case ith terms such as disgraceful,sham,man+handled, tyrantetc', ut # phrases and s#ntagms. 1hus ith a term such as todisrupt, the evaluative e!!ect can onl# e determined hen the ver and itsgrammatical Aject are considered together as a comination. When the Aject o!todisrupthas a positive attitudinal value or is unspeci!ied attitudinall#, then thecomination ill conve# a negative assessment o! the disrupter$, (=ohn disrupted theclass again.' hile this negative assessment ill not appl# hen the Aject carriesnegative value (They disrupted the flow of drugs into the country.'

What this all means !or our anal#sis o! the anti:hinese protest e3tract is that erecognise that the !ormulation a>n? attempt to disrupt the royal processionmust e

seen as attitudinall# open or amiguous, given the attitudinal variailit# hich e

p. 4


15/25

have shon to e a !eature o! the term disrupt. *nd !or our more general concern iththe evaluative mechanisms availale to the journalist author, it means that e mustac"noledge that such terms rel# on reader in!erence !or at least part o! theirattitudinal e!!ect and hence should not e seen as operating ith the same degree o!attitudinal e3plicitness as attitudinall# stale terms such as disgraceful, betray,

swindle, brutalise or tyrant.&t should perhaps e noted that it is not onl# vers hich are t#picall# associated ithauthorial disapproval@censure hich demonstrate this propert#. We also !ind a similar

process o! de!aultattitude deactivation@limitation ith some vers hich are t#picall#positive in orientation. :onsider # a# o! e3ample, vers such as to help$, toassist$, ver hich, o! course, are t#picall# positive. 5oever, just as in the case o!disrupt$ or damage$, this attitudinal de!ault can e deactivated. 7or e3ample,

H.. intelligence o!!icials elieve that alDar>ai helpedthe terrorists ho"illed ?r. 7ole#, a H.. diplomat, in *mman, ordan, in Actoer.IWashington Post, 40@6@200

.ashtimes.com@national@200064042=6=/62-r.htmJ

1he term brush asideis a somehat similar case to disrupt. &nterestingl# hoever,hile the term does seem to operate ith some de!inite attitudinal associations, thereis a much more even alance eteen possile positivit# and possile negativit#.Evidence !rom the )an" o! English indicates that brush asideis !re>uentl# used inconte3ts here some action is eing negativel# construed and here there is theimplication that the action is overl# dismissive, negligent or authoritarian. 7ore3ample,

5oever, in the long run, the child hose needs are met ma"es !eerdemands than the child hose needs are suppressed or punished. Parents,even ellmeaning, loving parents, o!ten ignore or rush asidetheir childsneeds ecause the parents are us#. I)an" o! English roo"s@HO corpusJ

1his is certainl# the sense & dra !rom brushed asidein the headline to this e3tract(;nti+hinese protest brushed aside'. & in!er !rom this that the authorities responsile!or the brushing asidehave een heav#handed and have shon scant regard !or the

protestor$s right to !ree speech. A! course, & must ac"noledge the in!luence o! m#on particular reading position one hich is generall# supportive o!antigovernment protests and one hich is speci!icall# supportive o! protests againstthe :hinese government$s actions in 1iet. *gainst this, it is necessar# to note that anopposite reading ma# e availale to those or"ing !rom a di!!erent reading position.

&n this regard & note that the )an" o! English provides numerous instances herebrushing asideoperates ith positive associations, ith the rusher aside$ presentedas potent or resilient and the rushed aside$ as ea" or ine!!ective and@or in someother a# unorth#. 7or e3ample,

1he onl# reason she hadnt connected them e!ore as that Richard anderem# ere poles apart as people. :ompared to his son, erem# asnothing, just a smalltime e3pat, eas# to rush aside and !orget aoutcompletel#.

p. 4=


16/25

Earlier, 1odd must have een alarmed at the a# his de!ence parted,alloing 7aian de!reitas to rush aside a hal!hearted challenge !romRoie Elliott and put West )rom ahead.

*ccordingl#, it ma# e possile, given a particular reading position, to read thisopening headline as indicating a negative vie o! the protestors as ea", ine!!ectiveor poorl# organised and perhaps even o! the authorities as poer!ul and in control.1his is, in !act the vie ta"en # a minorit# o! respondents to the reader responsesurve# mentioned previousl#, t#picall# those !or hom lone Tiananmen S9uare stylehad no positive associations, and ho read attempt to disrupt as condemnator# o! the

protestor.

Ance again e see evaluative positioning via association and in!erence rather than #e3plicit authorial announcement. &n this e3tract as a hole e also oserve ho anultimate evaluative e!!ect ma# depend on interactions eteen a series o! theseassociative and in!erential meanings. 1hus, hen lone Tiananmen S9uare+styleis readas indicating approval !or the protestor, then the other attitudinal to"ens line up, so to

spea", and also point in the direction o! positive regard !or his act o! protest.5oever, should the potential positivit# o! lone Tiananmen S9uare+stylenot e ta"enup, then the remaining to"ens ma# point in the opposite attitudinal direction.

"ttribution and evaluative positioning&t turn no to another o! the issues !oreshadoed in the opening rhetorical e!!ectsassociated ith e3plicitl# evaluative material hich is attriuted to e3ternal sources. &am speci!icall# concerned ith the means # hich authorial alignment ith, ordisalignment !rom, the reported value position ma# e signalled. uch mechanismsare, o! course, a "e# evaluative mechanism in their on right, ut also o! interest isthe a# in hich the# interact ith the t#pes o! meanings just discussed.

&t is an ovious !eature o! nes report that the# ma"e !re>uent use o! >uotation tointroduce into the te3t all manner o! accusations, criticisms, demands and contentiousclaims on the part o! e3perts, politicians, communit# leaders, interested parties,e#eitnesses, victims and so on. 1he media$s on vie o! such an evaluativemechanism is that it is entirel# compatile ith authorial neutralit# and ojectivit#.1hus, !or e3ample, the ournalism 404$ e site o! the8ayton 8aily 0ewsstates,

uotes and their attriutions present opinions o! others ojectivel#. ince itis di!!icult to "no hat people elieve or !eel, journalists report hat

people sa# the# elieve or !eel. uch things are not to e assumed # thejournalistL *ttriution is needed hen the !acts presented are consideredcontroversial or not common "noledge. &! the as"etall team ins its!ourth game in a ro, such a !act is common "noledge. )ut i! the in as

ecause the center pla#ed the est game o! his career, the journalist needs toattriute that in!ormation to someone, perhaps the coach or a !an. &! thereporter injects such in!ormation in a stor# ithout attriution, it is notojective. )ut i! the reporter as"s the coach i! this is the centers est gameever, the repl# is !act (hatever is said' ecause it as given # the coach.$I!rom http+@@.activeda#ton.com@ddn@nie@journalism@accessed Act 2-,2002J

uch an account o!!ers a simplistic !ormula # hich the journalist author is asolved

o! an# responsiilit# !or evaluative material as long as that material has een

p. 46
http://www.activedayton.com/ddn/nie/journalism/http://www.activedayton.com/ddn/nie/journalism/


17/25

attriuted in some a# to an e3ternal source. ?an# anal#sts, as a counter to such acharacterisation, have noted that the ver# act o! selecting a source and a particularsuselection o! their ords !or inclusion in the report carries ith it evaluative andultimatel# ideological conse>uences (see !or e3ample 5erman 8 :homs"# 2002, or7airclough 4//='. 1he act, # implication, construes the selected point o! vie as in

some a# signi!icant, relevant or otherise orth# o! the mass media audience$sattention. &t ta"e this as a given ut see" to develop the discussion !urther # attendingmore narrol# to the mechanisms # hich the reader can e positioned to regardsome attriuted material as more credile, reliale or plausile and other attriutedmaterial as less so. 1his is, in !act, a >uite diverse topic hich oviousl# cannot ecomprehensivel# handled in the current conte3t. 5ere & !ocus on just a !e o! themechanisms availale to the riter in order to demonstrate the potential evaluative!unctionalit# o! attriution more generall#. peci!icall# & consider the !olloing+

aut)orial endorsement here the reported value position is !ramed or projected #!ormulations hich simultaneousl# align the authorial voice ith that value position

and, # implication, construe it as true or otherise arrantale,aut)orial distancing here the reported value position is !ramed or projected #!ormulations hich overtl# distance the authorial voice !rom the attriuted materialand provide a signal that alternative o! contrar# viepoints ma# e valid,

evidential standing here the social standing or authorit# o! the source is such thatit can act as a sign (a to"en' that the associated value position is ell!ounded,reasonale or otherise credile.

"uthorial endorsement&n attitudinall# unconstrained registers, it is ala#s availale to the riter to overtl#

declare their support !rom some reported proposition or point o! vie # declaring itto e true or !alse, credile or non credile, or # passing positive judgement on thereliailit#, honest# or isdom o! the source itsel!. 7or e3ample,

1he *rchishop o! :anterur# rightl# descries the mass "illing o! childrenas the most evil "ind o! action e can imagine$ IThe 0ew Statesman,editorial, 4@0/@0


18/25

1he &ra>i leader has also een secretl# tr#ing to u# uranium !rom *!rica !oruse in nuclear eapons. I1he Evening tandard (%ondon' 2 has an armour# o! chemical eapons is on stand# !or use ithin


19/25

ell!ounded. 1he termfound goes one step !urther toards !activit#$, as the authorso! the stud# are presented, not as asserting this negative proposition, ut as having

foundit to e true. Readers o! such a te3t are there!ore are more strongl# conditionedto regard the allegations against the !ood companies as proven$ than i! the allegationshad simpl# eing reported.

"uthorial distancing&t is e>uall# availale to the riter, at least in interpersonall# unconstrained registers,to indicate their rejection or disproval o! attriuted material via e3plicitl# attitudinalmeanings. 7or e3ample,

4. 1A9*V e e3pose ho the8aily Mailprinted a pac" o! lies aout the9u"e and 9uchess o! Vor" on their panish holida#L1he paper rongl#claims the ro#als had roed aout carr#ing the luggage and said therelationship eteen the FdisunitedF 9u"e and 9uchess is Forne along onan undercurrent o! itterness and recriminationF. IThe Mirror6@/@2002J

2. Vou ere ma"ing the outlandishl# stupid assertion that the omens teamcouldnt eat a good high school clu teamL

Ance again, this option is not t#picall# ta"en up in the attitudinal constrained nesreporting hich is our current concern, ith journalistic authors pre!erring moreindirect mechanisms. :onsider # a# o! illustration the !olloing.

1ic"ner said regardless o! the result, the ro#al commission as a aste o!mone# and he ould proceed ith a separate in>uir# into the issue headed

# ustice ane ?atthes. 5is attac" came as the *original omeninvolved in the case demanded a !emale minister e3amine the religious

elie!s the# claim are inherent in their !ight against a ridge to the island

near Coola in outh *ustralia. I)an" o! English A;Bes sucorpusJ

Botice that the vies o! 1ic"ner (ho at the time as the minister !or *original*!!airs in the *ustralian government' are reported via the versaid, hile the vieso! the *original oman are reported via the ver claim. :onsider the e!!ect i! thisarrangement had een reversed.

(reritten'1ic"ner has claimed that regardless o! the result, the ro#al commission as aaste o! mone# and he ould proceed ith a separate in>uir# into the issueheaded # ustice ane ?atthes. 5is attac" came as the *original omeninvolved in the case demanded a !emale minister e3amine the religious

elie!s hich the# sa# are inherent in their !ight against a ridge to the islandnear Coola in outh *ustralia.

& elieve that this contrast demonstrates that there is a s#stematic di!!erence eteento claimand more neutral$ reporting vers such as to sayin terms o! authorialsupport !or the attriuted proposition. )oth !ormulations ground the proposition in thecontingent sujectivit# o! some e3ternal source, thus shi!ting responsiilit# !or the

proposition aa# !rom the spea"er@riter and construing the value position as ut oneposition among a range o! possile points o! vie. 5oever, the# are di!!erent in thatto claimactivel# distances the riter !rom the attriuted material, presenting them asithholding support !or the proposition, hile to sayand related locutions are

neutral$ in that, o! themselves, the# present the riter neither as supportive o!, or

p. 4/


20/25

unsupportive o!, the proposition. 1he neutral to say!ormulations are laelledinstances o! ac"noledgement$ in the appraisal !rameor" and to claimand related!ormulations as instance o! distancing$.

&t is !re>uentl# the case that distancing locutions such as to claim ill e used henthe riter@spea"er is elsehere in the cote3t indicating an outright rejection o! theattriuted material, characterising it, !or e3ample, as untrue, deceit!ul, unreliale orillin!ormed. 7or e3ample,

9ont !orget that m o! R*? in #our P: is a practical minimum 2m isrecommended and the uir# has !ound.

(uate education aout di!!erent cultures andparental prejudices.

(/' :ommunities have little, i! an#thing, to do ith people outside their onrace or religion, it is claimed. L I8aily Mail, 4@0/@04'J

5ere, the riter initiall# indicates strong support !or the assertions outlined in thereport # the :RE. 7or e3ample, these are said to constitute a damning verdict andhence are construed as carr#ing signi!icant rhetorical eight, since verdictevo"esnotions o! due judicial delieration and damningimplies the poer to condemn.imilarl# the riter chooses to declare that the in>uir# hasfoundthat these conditionsappl# in )rad!ord rather than choosing to simpl# report hat the report states orasserts. 1hese initial !ormulations have an endorsing !unctionalit#, presenting theriter as generall# supportive o! a credile and compelling report. *ccordingl#, itould incoherent, or at least inconsistent, !or the riter to reverse this stance, and a!e sentences later (in /' to suggest that the report$s assertions are in some a#duious or rong. :ertainl# & don$t read the it is claimedin / as indicating that the

reported propositions are dout!ul. Rather & read it as a rhetorical gesture on the part

p. 20


21/25

o! the riter # hich, !or a rie! te3tual moment, he signals his distance !rom theattriuted material, there# putting on a sho o! journalistic neutralit# andimpartialit#.

Bevertheless, it is o!ten the case the to claim is used in nes reports o! the t#pe eare currentl# considering to undermine a given source and to indirectl# signal lac" o!support !or their value position. 5ere contrast is o!ten a crucial ingredient ith thevalue position o! a more !avoured source t#picall# eing !ramed # means o! neutralac"noledgement$ such assay, reported, declare, believe, ith the distancing e!!ectso! to claimonl# eing applied to the propositions o! less !avoured sources.

Evidential standing& turn !inall# to one remaining mechanism # hich readers can e positioned toregard attriuted material as true, credile or otherise arrantale. 1his mechanismoperates even hen a neutral$ ac"noledging locution is emplo#ed. :onsider # a#o! e3ample, the !olloing.

?ost scientists no elieve that the apparent !ossils inside a ?artian roc"that landed in *ntarctica ere chemical arte!acts, not evidence o! iologicalactivit# as reported in *ugust 4//6.

5ere the reader is positioned to vie as highl# arrantale the proposition thattheapparent fossils inside a Martian rock that landed in ;ntarctica were chemical

artefacts. 1his positioning !ollos !rom the nature o! the source ith hom theproposition is associated. &n this case that source is presented as eing a largegrouping, speci!icall# the majorit# o! e3perts in the relevant !ield ho presumal#can e relied upon in this instance.. & propose the term evidential standing$ as a lael!or this e!!ect. 1he elevated evidential standing associated ith most scientistsacts, at

least potentiall#, to heighten the arrantailit# o! the proposition. A! course, it muste noted that such !ormulations can onl# act as attitudinal to"en$ o! reliailit# orcrediilit#. 1he# do not constitute e3plicit assessments and accordingl# still leave itup to the reader, depending on their reader position, to appl# or not to appl# thisin!erence.

* related e!!ect can e oserved in the !olloing.,

Belson ?andela has stated that FPalestinians are not struggling !or a FstateFut !or !reedom, lieration and e>ualit#, just li"e e ere struggling !or!reedom in outh *!rica.F

5ere the evidential standing is a matter o! the social status o! the source (Belson

?andela'. ?andela$s standing in the communit# has the potential to act as anattitudinal to"en # hich the proposition attriuted to ?andela ill e regarded ashighl# arrantale, depending, o! course, on the values and elie!s the reader ringsto their reading o! the te3t.

&ntriguingl#, a similar e!!ect can o!ten e achieved hen the spea"er@riter indicatesthat a viepoint is that o! some e3ternal source ut does not state speci!icall# hothat source is. 7or e3ample,

9omestic prolems such as child ause and neglect, ro"en homes, andrunaa# #outh jeopardi;e the health o! children. &n 4//2, 2./ million

p. 24


22/25

children in the Hnited tates ere reportedl# aused, neglected, or oth. J)an" o! English, H academic sucorpusJ

)ut the !#nos is not just eauti!ul. %i"e tropical rain!orest, it is elieved toe a rich repositor# o! natural medicines I)an" o! English Be cientistsucorpusJ

5ere, reportedlyand it is believedpotentiall# give rise to the in!erence that the source!or these proposition is so diverse and idel# spread that it does not need to e morenarrol# speci!ied. 1hese and similar !ormulations thus construe the proposition the#!rame as highl# arrantale, even hile nevertheless removing direct responsiilit#!or the proposition !rom the riter.

&oncluding remarks1he !rameor" & am proposing, then, is designed to identi!# the mechanism # hichthe attitudinall# constrained, largel# attitudinall# ine3plicit nes reporting o! the

roadsheet media ac>uire the potential to position the reader to !avour a particularvalue position. Oe# devices here involve the use o! meanings hich, as attitudinalto"ens, invo"e rather than inscrie attitudinal assessments and the use o! !orms o!attriution to indirectl# indicate authorial alignment ith, or disaligment !rom,e3ternall# sourced value positions. 1hese invocations involve mechanisms o!in!erence and attitudinal association, and var# in the degree to hich the riter can eseen to e sujectivel# intervening in the te3t. & propose the lael evocation here nosujective intervention on the part o! the author is immediatel# apparent and the lael

provocation here the sujective intervention is apparent in the !orm o!, !or e3ample,analog#, intensi!ication or countere3pectation. 1hese attitudinal to"ens !re>uentl#interact ith each other, ith an# e3plicit attitudinal inscriptions hich ma# e

present and ith e3ternall# sourced evaluations as a particular attitudinal orientationis estalished !or the te3t as a hole. & elieve that this !rameor" ta"es us e#ondanal#tical methodologies hich have hitherto een availale in that it provides !or ane3plicit and principled account o! oth e3plicitl# and implicitl# evaluative meaningsand the a#s in hich the# interact in te3t. 1he more implicitl# evaluativemechanisms are o! particular interest to those concerned ith ideolog# in that the#

provide means # hich particular points o! vie and value orientations can e madeto seem to arise naturall# !rom apparentl# !actual$ in!ormational content.

'eference (ist

)ird, E. 8 R. 9ardenne 4/Myth, hronicle ;nd Story + Axploring the 0arrative


23/25

Eldridge, . (ed.' 4//"etting the Message + 0ews, Truth and &ower,%ondon, Routledge.

Ericson, R.N. 8 )arane", P.?. 4//4@epresenting 7rder: rime, Baw and =ustice in the 0ews Media,?ilton Oe#nes,

Apen Hniversit# Press.

7airclough, B. 4/S9iscourse Representation in ?edia 9iscourseT, Sociolinguistics4- (2'+ 42=/.

7airclough, B. 4//=Media 8iscourse,%ondon, Edard *rnold.

7is", . 4//@eading The &opular,%ondon 8 Be Vor", Routledge.

7oler, R. 4//4.Banguage in the 0ews + 8iscourse and Ideology in the &ress,%ondon, Routledge.

5allida#, ?.*.O. 4//

evaluative semantics and ideological positioning in journalistic discourse – a new framework for...

Documents