Cover not available
Article published In:
Functions of Language
Vol. 25:3 (2018) ► pp.335–362

A framework for analyzing evaluative language in historical discourse

| Keio University

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

Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Overview of the levels of evaluation framework
    • 2.1Inter-evaluation
    • 2.2Super-evaluation
    • 2.3Extra-evaluation
    • 2.4Meta-evaluation
    • 2.5Interaction among levels of evaluation
  • 3.Appraisal theory and the levels of evaluation framework
    • 3.1Attitude
      • 3.1.1Affect
      • 3.1.2Judgment
      • 3.1.3Appreciation
    • 3.2Engagement
      • 3.2.1Inter-evaluative Engagement resources
      • 3.2.2Super-evaluative Engagement resources
      • 3.2.3Extra-evaluative Engagement resources
  • 4.Applying the framework: Inter, super and extra-evaluation
  • 5.Levels of Evaluation and the disciplinary activities of historians
  • 6.Meta-evaluative level
    • 6.1Status
    • 6.2Value
    • 6.3Analysis of meta-evaluation
  • 7.Conclusion
  • References
Published online: 2 November 2018
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.15053.mys
References
Barnard, Christopher
2003 Pearl Harbor in Japanese high school history textbooks: The grammar and semantics of responsibility. In J. R. Martin & Ruth Wodak (eds.), Re/reading the past: Critical and functional perspectives on time and value, 247–271. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barton, Keith C.
2004 Primary sources in history: Breaking through the myths. The Phi Delta Kappan 86(10). 745–753. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, Basil
2003 The structuring of pedagogic discourse (Vol. IV of Class, codes and control). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Brune, Nick
2003 Defining Canada: History, identity and culture. Oakville: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Coffin, Caroline
2000 History as discourse: Construals of time, cause and appraisal. Sydney: University of New South Wales PhD thesis.Google Scholar
2006 Historical discourse: The language of time, cause and evaluation. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Cortazzi, Martin & Lixian Jin
2000 Evaluating evaluation in narrative. In Susan Hunston & Geoff Thompson (eds.), 102–120.Google Scholar
Du Bois, John W.
2007 The stance triangle. In Robert Englebretson (ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction, 139–182. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, Doris Kearns
1991 Lyndon Johnson and the American Dream. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen
2004 An introduction to functional grammar, 3rd edn. London: Hodder Education.Google Scholar
Haskell, Thomas L.
1998 Objectivity is not neutrality: Explanatory schemes in history. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Hoey, Michael
1983 On the surface of discourse. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Hood, Susan
2010 Appraising research: Evaluation in academic writing. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hunston, Susan
1989 Evaluation in experimental research articles. Birmingham: University of Birmingham PhD thesis.Google Scholar
1994 Evaluation and organization in a sample of written academic discourse. In Malcolm Coulthard (ed.), Advances in written text analysis, 191–218. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
1995 Evaluation and ideology in scientific writing. In Mohsen Ghadessy (ed.), Register analysis: Theory and practice, 57–73. London: Pinter.Google Scholar
2000 Evaluation and the planes of discourse: Status and value in persuasive texts. In Susan Hunston & Geoff Thompson (eds.), 176–207.Google Scholar
Hyland, Ken
1994 Hedging in academic textbooks and EAP. English for Specific Purposes 3(3). 239–256. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2005 Metadiscourse. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Lee, Sook Hee
2015 Evaluative stances in persuasive essays by undergraduate students: Focusing on appreciation resources. Text & Talk 35(1). 49–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Macken-Horarik, Mary
2003 Appraisal and the special instructiveness of narrative. Text 23(2). 285–312. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martin, J. R.
1993 Life as a noun: Arresting the universe in science and the humanities. In M. A. K. Halliday & J. R. Martin (eds.), Writing science: Literacy and discursive power, 221–267. London: Falmer.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R., Karl A. Maton & Erika S. Matruglio
2010 Historical cosmologies: Epistemology and axiology in Australian secondary school history discourse. Revista Signos 43(74). 443–463. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martin, J. R. & Peter R. R. White
2005 The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. London: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moss, Gillian
2010 Textbook language, ideology and citizenship: The case of a history textbook in Colombia. Functions of Language 17(1). 71–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Myskow, Gordon
2017 Surveying the historical landscape: The evaluative voice of history textbooks. Functional Linguistics 4(7). 1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018a Calibrating the ‘right values’: The role of critical inquiry tasks in social studies textbooks. Visual Communication. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2018b Changes in attitude: Evaluative language in secondary school and university history textbooks. Linguistics and Education 431. 53–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
In press. Appraisal in history: Construals of significance, fortune, and status. Linguistics and the Human Sciences.
Ngo, Thu & Len Unsworth
2015 Reworking the Appraisal framework in ESL research: Refining attitude resources. Functional Linguistics 2(1). 1–24. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nir, Bracha & Elisabeth Zima
2017 The power of engagement: Stance-taking, dialogical resonance and the construction of intersubjectivity. Functions of Language 24(1). 3–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Novick, Peter
1988 That noble dream: The ‘objectivity question’ and the American historical profession. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oteíza, Teresa
2003 How contemporary history is presented in Chilean middle school textbooks. Discourse & Society 14(5). 639–660. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Oteíza, Teresa & Claudio Pinuer
2013 Valorative prosody and the symbolic construction of time in recent national historical discourses. Discourse Studies 15(1). 43–64. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2016 Appraisal framework and critical discourse studies: A joint approach to the study of historical memories from an intermodal perspective. International Journal of Language Studies 101. 5–32.Google Scholar
Ricoeur, Paul
2004 Memory, history and forgetting. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schleppegrell, Mary J., Mariana Achugar & Teresa Oteíza
2004 The grammar of history: Enhancing content-based instruction through a functional focus on language. TESOL Quarterly 38(1). 67–93. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Seixas, Peter
1997 Mapping the terrain of historical significance. Social Education 61(1). 22–27.Google Scholar
2000 Schweigen! Die Kinder! In Peter N. Stearns, Peter Seixas & Sam Wineburg (eds.), Knowing, teaching and learning history: National and international perspectives, 19–37. New York, NY: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Tann, Ken
2010 Imagining communities: A multifunctional approach to identity management in texts. In Monika Bednarek & J. R. Martin (eds.), New Discourse on Language, 163–194. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
Thompson, Geoff & Jianglin Zhou
2000 Evaluation and organization in text: The structuring role of evaluative disjuncts. In Susan Hunston & Geoff Thompson (eds.), 121–141.Google Scholar
Veel, Robert & Caroline Coffin
1996 Learning to think like an historian: The language of secondary school history. In Ruqaiya Hasan & Geoff Williams (eds.), Literacy in Society, 191–231. London: Longman.Google Scholar
White, Peter R. R.
2003 Beyond modality and hedging: A dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance. Text 23(2). 259–284. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2012 Exploring the axiological workings of ‘reporter voice’ news stories: Attribution and attitudinal positioning. Discourse, Context & Media 12(3). 57–67. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wignell, Peter
1994 Genre across the curriculum. Linguistics and Education 6(4). 355–372. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 4 other publications

Baguley, Margaret & Martin Kerby
2022. A beautiful and devilish thing: children’s picture books and the 1914 Christmas Truce. Visual Communication 21:4 ► pp. 518 ff. DOI logo
Cheng, Shi
2023. A review of interpersonal metafunction studies in systemic functional linguistics (2012–2022). Journal of World Languages 0:0 DOI logo
Myskow, Gordon
2018. Changes in attitude: Evaluative language in secondary school and university history textbooks. Linguistics and Education 43 ► pp. 53 ff. DOI logo
Schleppegrell, Mary J., Sida Sun & Chauncey Monte-Sano
2023. The value of models to support students' voice in middle school social studies argument writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 61 ► pp. 101043 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 september 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.