Cover not available
Article published In:
Functions of Language
Vol. 29:2 (2022) ► pp.199–225

Redefining attitude for studying explicit and indirect evaluations of human behaviour

ORCID logo | University of East Anglia | University of Reading

This article considers the application of the Attitude framework (Martin & White 2005) to study the evaluation of human behaviour. The distinction between inscribed (explicit) and invoked (indirect) attitude is re-examined and systematised to better operationalise the analysis of the evaluation of behaviour. General linguistic evaluation triggers are identified for inscribed and invoked evaluations, and the annotation scheme is applied in a corpus of texts from different registers (a psychiatric manual, educational guidelines and informal online exchanges) concerned with ADHD. Indirect evaluations of behaviour are described as attitudinal inferences derived from (i) the behaviours of the individuals, (ii) the behavioural outcomes, (iii) the impact that the behaviour or its outcomes have on third parties and the actions that the latter may perform as a result. It is proposed that indirect evaluations of people’s behaviour are metonymically inferred through an effect→cause relation drawn across the different parts of an action scenario. The conceptual metonymy explains the directionality observed in attitude analyses (Appreciation attitude type may stand as tokens of Judgment), and it shows the impossibility of evaluating performances without indirectly appraising the human behaver.

Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.ADHD
  • 3.Data and methodological considerations
  • 4.Evaluation in language
    • 4.1Appraisal
    • 4.2Difficulties in operationalising attitude
      • 4.2.1Appreciation, Judgement and Russian Dolls
      • 4.2.2Systematising the analysis of attitude inscription
  • 5.Redefining attitude for a study of human behaviour
    • 5.1Inscribed evaluations of behaviour
    • 5.2Invoked evaluations of behaviour
  • 6.Invoked evaluations of behaviour as metonymic-based attitudinal inferences
  • 7.Attitudes associated to ADHD
  • 8.Concluding remarks
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 4 March 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.21022.vil
References (35)
ADHD-Europe
2009 ADHD-Europe declaration about AD/HD. Retrieved from: [URL]
American Psychiatric Association
2013 Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 5th edn. APA: Arlington. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bartlett, Tom
2014 Analysing power in language: A practical guide. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bednarek, Monika
2009a Dimensions of evaluation: Cognitive and linguistic perspectives. Pragmatics & Cognition 17(1). 146–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2009b Polyphony in Appraisal: Typological and topological perspectives. Linguistics and the Human Sciences 3(2). 107–136.Google Scholar
Benítez Castro, Miguel-Ángel & Encarnación Hidalgo-Tenorio
2019 Rethinking Martin & White’s affect taxonomy. In J. Lachlan Mackenzie & Laura Alba Juez (eds.), Emotion in discourse, 301–331. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Canu, Will H., Matthew L. Newman, Tara L. Morrow & Daniel L. Pope
2008 Social appraisal of adult ADHD: stigma and influences of the beholder’s Big Five personality traits. Journal of Attention Disorders 11(6). 700–710. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fuoli, Matteo
2018 A stepwise method for annotating APPRAISAL. Functions of Language 25(2). 229–258. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Fuoli, Matteo & Charlotte Hommerberg
2015 Optimising transparency, reliability and replicability: Annotation principles and inter-coder agreement in the quantification of evaluative expressions. Corpora 10(3). 315–349. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, Raymond W.
1999 Speaking and thinking with metonymy. In Klaus-Uwe Panther & Günter Radden (eds.), 60–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Greenway, Charlotte. W. & Alison Rees Edwards
2020 Knowledge and attitudes towards attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): A comparison of teachers and teaching assistants. Australian Journal of Learning Difficulties 25(1). 31–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen
2004 Introduction to Functional Grammar. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hidalgo-Tenorio, Encarnación, & Miguel-Ángel Benítez-Castro
2020 Trump’s populist discourse and affective politics, or on how to move ‘the People’ through emotion. Globalisation, Societies and Education 1–24.Google Scholar
2021 The language of evaluation in the narratives by the Magdalene Laundries survivors: The discourse of female victimhood. Applied Linguistics 42(2). 315–341. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hood, Susan
2019 Appraisal. In Geoff Thompson, Wendy L. Bowcher, Lise Fontaine & David Schönthal (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of Systemic Functional Linguistics, 382–409. Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hood, Susan, & J. R. Martin
2005 Invoking Attitude: The play of graduation in appraising discourse. In Ruqaiya Hasan, Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen & Jonathan Webster (eds.), Continuing discourse on Language: A functional perspective, 739–764. London: Equinox.Google Scholar
Hunston, Susan
2011 Corpus approaches to evaluation Phraseology and evaluative language. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hunston, Susan, & Hang Su
2019 Patterns, constructions, and local grammar: A case study of ‘evaluation’. Applied Linguistics 40(4). 567–593. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lebowitz, Matthew S.
2016 Stigmatization of ADHD: A developmental review. Journal of Attention Disorders 20(3). 199–205. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Malmberg, Kerstin, Tobias Edbom, Hanna-Linn Wargelius, & Jan-Olov Larsson
2011 Psychiatric problems associated with subthreshold ADHD and disruptive behaviour diagnoses in teenagers. Acta Paediatrica 100(11). 1468–1475. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Martin, J. R.
2003 Introduction. Text 231. 171–81.Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. & Peter R. R. White
2005 The language of evaluation. Appraisal in English. New York, NY: Palgrave. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mueller, Anna, Anselm B. M. Fuermaier, Janneke Koerts & Lara Tucha
2012 Stigma in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. ADHD: Attention Deficit & Hyperactivity Disorders 4(3). 101–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pounds, Gabrina
2010 Attitude and subjectivity in Italian and British hard-news reporting: The construction of a culture-specific ‘reporter’voice. Discourse Studies 12(1). 106–137. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Panther, Klaus-Uwe & Günter Radden
1999 Metonymy in language and thought. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Panther, Klaus-Uwe & Linda L. Thornburg
1998 A cognitive approach to inferencing in conversation. Journal of Pragmatics 30(6). 755–769. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2003 Introduction: On the nature of conceptual metonymy. In Klaus-Uwe Panther & Linda L. Thornburg (eds.), Metonymy and pragmatic inferencing, 1–20. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2017 Metaphor and metonymy in language and thought: A cognitive linguistic approach. Synthesis Philosophica 32(2). 271–294. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Radden, Günter & Zoltan Kövecses
1999 Towards a theory of metonymy. In Klaus-Uwe Panther & Günter Radden (eds.), 17–59. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Singh, Ilina, Tim Kendall, Clare Taylor, Alex Mears, Chris Hollis, Martin Batty, Sinead Keenan
2010 Young people’s experience of ADHD and stimulant medication: A qualitative study for the NICE guideline. Child Adolescent Mental Health 15(4).186–192. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, Geoff
2008 Appraising glances: Evaluating Martin’s model of APPRAISAL. Word 59(1–2). 169–187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2014 Affect and emotion, target value mismatches, and Russian dolls. Refining the Appraisal model. In Geoff Thompson & Laura Alba-Juez (eds.), Evaluation in context, 47–66. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walker, Janet S., Daniel Coleman, Junghee Lee, Peter N. Squire & Barbara J. Friesen
2008 Children’s stigmatization of childhood depression and ADHD: Magnitude and demographic variation in a national sample. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry 47(8). 912–920. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
White, Peter R. R.
2006 Evaluative semantics and ideological positioning in journalistic discourse. A new framework for analysis. In Inger Lassen, Jeanne Strunck & Torben Vestergaard (eds.), Mediating ideology in text and image: Ten critical studies, 37–67. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 Appraisal. In Jan Zienkowski, Jan-Ola Östman & Jef Verschueren (eds.), Discursive pragmatics, 14–36. Amsterdam: Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by 1 other publications

Cheng, Shi
2023. A review of interpersonal metafunction studies in systemic functional linguistics (2012–2022). Journal of World Languages 0:0 DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 4 july 2024. 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.