A protocol for the annotation of evaluative stance and metaphor across four discourse genres
The present article contributes to research on evaluation by addressing two complementary objectives: first, we
present a protocol for the identification and annotation of evaluation in English discourse and, second, we show the results of
the implementation of the protocol in the annotation of evaluation in a sample of a corpus of four genres. We first describe the
protocol by discussing the theoretical and methodological grounding of the annotation scheme, the criteria, the categories, the
steps for the implementation of the protocol and an illustrative example of the application of the protocol to a short extract. We
subsequently provide the preliminary results of a pilot study with the frequency of evaluative expressions across the four genres.
Results show that while adjectives and non-metaphoric evaluative expressions are overall more frequent, there are differences
regarding the preference for positive or negative value and regarding the frequency of function.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.A protocol for the identification and annotation of evaluation in discourse
- 2.1Evaluation and stance: Theoretical grounding and methodological issues
- 2.2Motivations for the design of the protocol
- 2.3Criteria for identifying evaluative stance
- 2.4Categories
- 2.4.1Part of speech
- 2.4.2Function
- 2.4.3Metaphoricity
- 2.4.4Value
- 2.5Annotation procedure
- 2.6Stages in the development and implementation of the protocol
- 3.Implementing the protocol: An example
- 4.Variation of evaluation across genres: A pilot study
- 4.1Data
- 4.2Method
- 4.3Results and discussion
- 4.4Examples from the different genres: Preliminary results from case studies
- 4.4.1Newspaper opinion discourse
- 4.4.2Political discourse
- 4.4.3Press popularization articles
- 4.4.4Fora
- 5.Conclusions
- Notes
-
References