Intertextuality

monogloss vs. heterogloss

• Utterances can be classified as monogloss or heterogloss.

• Those that deliberately seek to signal the existence of other voices is

labelled as heterogloss utterances (White 2003; Martin & White

2005).

• In contrast to heterogloss utterances, monogloss utterances do not

explicitly refer to other sources and indicate that the writer or

speaker is the originator and the source of the assertions

monogloss vs. heterogloss

• Heterogloss utterances are classified as (1) those that invite the

reader to question the proposition put forward by the writer and (2)

those that aim to lay open to scrutiny propositions expressed by

other voices.

• The former aims at ‘closing down the space for dialogic alternatives’

(Martin & White 2005:140) and is classified as dialogic

contraction.

• The latter kind of utterance is labelled as ‘dialogic expansion since

they ‘open up the space for alternative positions’ (Martin & White

2005:140).

monogloss vs. heterogloss

• ‘Dialogic contraction’ is typically signalled by reporting verbs that

are non-evaluative such as ‘demonstrates’, ‘shows’, ‘manifests’,

‘reveals’, whereas ‘Dialogic expansion’ is signalled by the use of

reporting verbs such as ‘claims’, ‘argues’ etc.

• when a message is reported as true, denotative reporting verbs such

as acknowledge, point out, establish are used.

• Non-factive attitude to report propositions/message is indicated

through the use of reporting verbs such as argue, exaggerate, ignore,

claim etc.

He contend that He’s certain

He suspects

It’s obvious

It seems

monogloss vs. heterogloss

Dialogic contraction vs. Dialogic expansion

• McGuinness doesn't have anything positive to say about `the

chattering classes', of which he has long been a member.

• It seems that McGuinness is scathing about `the chattering classes'

• McGuinness is, of course, scathing about `the chattering classes‘

• It's possible that McGuinness is scathing about `the chattering

classes'

Dialogic contraction vs. Dialogic expansion

• McGuinness doesn't have anything positive to say about `the

chattering classes', of which he has long been a member. (Dialogic

contraction)

• It seems that McGuinness is scathing about `the chattering classes‘

(Dialogic expansion)

• McGuinness is, of course, scathing about `the chattering classes”

(Dialogic contraction)

• It's possible that McGuinness is scathing about `the chattering

classes‘ (Dialogic expansion)

Dialogic contraction vs. Dialogic expansion

• Indeed withholding exposure to culturally authentic dialogue is

“disempowering and patronising” (Carter in Burns 2001).

• Burns (2001) points out that students sense of security “evaporates”

when confronted by authentic discourse exchanges.

• Eggins (2000) makes the point that we do ourselves and the

discourse community a great service

Dialogic contraction vs. Dialogic expansion

• Indeed withholding exposure to culturally authentic dialogue is

“disempowering and patronising” (Carter in Burns 2001). (Dialogic

contraction)

• Burns (2001) points out that students sense of security “evaporates”

when confronted by authentic discourse exchanges. (Dialogic

contraction)

• Eggins (2000) makes the point that we do ourselves and the

discourse community a great service. (Dialogic contraction)

Intertextuality

• ‘For any particular text or type of text, there is a set of other texts

and a set of voices which are potentially relevant, and potentially

incorporated into the text’

• The notion of intertextuality offers a perspective of both reading and

writing texts as a way of looking at a text’s interactions with prior

texts, writers, readers, and conventions.

• Intertextuality – the act of referring to or quoting texts outside of

one’s immediate discourse. It is a “sort of cross-reference to another

text or type of text” (p. 29). Words may be borrowed or switched

from one social language and used in another (p. 58)

Assumptions vs. Intertextuality

• Texts always make assumptions, e.g., Jane’s sister bought a car.

• Assumptions = various types of implicitness, especially ‘presuppositions’.

• Similarity:

• Assumptions are similar to intertextuality. That is, “what is ‘said’ in a text is

‘said’ against a background of what is ‘unsaid’, but taken as given.”

• Differences:

• Intertextuality opens up difference (by bringing various other ‘voices’ into a

text)

• Assumptions reduce difference (by assuming the existence of ‘common

ground’ between voices)

Framing

• One aspect of texturing which is important here is framing.

• This refers to how reported voices are ‘framed’ (or contextualised)

inside the main authorial voice of the text.

• In this sense, Intertextuality is the shaping of a text’s meaning by

another text.

• These references are made to influence that reader and add layers of

depth to a text, based on the readers’ prior knowledge and

understanding. Intertextuality is a discourse strategy.

Intertextuality

• Fairclough defines Intertextuality very broadly to include various external

relations between texts, such as:

1. quotations (direct speech), e.g. Jane said, ‘I will be late tonight’.

2. reported speech (indirect speech), e.g. Jane said she would be late tonight.

3. texts which are incorporated into another text without attribution, e.g. ‘Jane

will be late tonight’.

There is likely to be some tension between the reporting text and the reported

text, in terms of their meanings, ideologies, discourses, etc.

• We can begin our analysis of intertextuality in a text by asking: What texts

and voices are included, which are excluded, and what significant absences

are there?

• Intertextuality may be attributed clearly to particular people or attributed

vaguely. Using vague attribution makes it more difficult for other people to

challenge than if we use specific attribution. Non-attributed intertextuality

is common in spoken language.

• Reporting is a form of intertextuality. When one text reports the speech,

writing or thought of another person, it means that two texts or voices (and

therefore, two perspectives, interests, visions etc.) are brought into a

relation of dialogue with each other.

Intertextuality

تطوان من أمانديس شركة رحيل تنفي مسؤولة جهات

من للرحيل تستعد ”البيئة فيوليا ” شركة أن مفاده خبر اإللكترونية المواقع من مجموعة روجت

و طنجة أمانديس ، تطوان أمانديس شركاتها بين من تدير التي الشركة هذه ، نهائي بشكل المغرب

بكل السائل التطهير و الكهرباء و الماء توزيع تدبير لها المفوض الشركات الرباط، ريضال كذلك

من مجموعة لنا صرحت ما حسب الصحة من له أساس ال الخبر هذا . الرباط و طنجة و تطوان من

بعض كذلك و ، لتطوان الحضرية الجماعة داخل من أو مباشرة أمانديس داخل سواء الجهات

. الداخلية لوزارة الملحقة المصالح

----------------------------------------------------------

جيلكم إن" :األمة مباني في المنفعلين الطالب من اآلالف أمام أمس األمريكي الرئيس صرح لقد

."متزايدة تحديات أو السرائيل مستقبال إما -سيحسم

Quote

Parody