This thesis presents an analytical study of the expression of evaluation in a highly opinionated type of discourse. This exploration, chiefly motivated by a concern with pedagogical issues, sought to identify and describe some of the strategies used by writers to convey explicit and implicit interpersonal meanings in order to help non-native learners read more critically. In particular, the study attempted to account for some resources of indirect evaluation which have been little described so far. The analysis is on the one hand based on some aspects of the Appraisal Theory, especially on White's (2004, 2005/6) notions of naturalisation and unarguability, and on the other on evaluation conveyed through attributed material. It is argued that such resources indirectly position readers in a stance similar to the writer's own, which places him/her in control of the material and thus, ultimately, of the readers' views. The study concluded that none of the individual strategies was significantly powerful by itself, but that they all interact and reinforce each other's meanings, adding to the cumulative attitudinal effect of the text. It is suggested that the strategies identified in this particular type of text are likely to occur in other text types as well.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:bl.uk/oai:ethos.bl.uk:514080 |
| Date | January 2009 |
| Creators | Jullian, Paula M. |
| Publisher | University of Birmingham |
| Source Sets | Ethos UK |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Electronic Thesis or Dissertation |
| Source | http://etheses.bham.ac.uk//id/eprint/316/ |
Page generated in 0.002 seconds