Martin & Rose (2007: 70-1):
Further complicating this issue is the implicit coupling of field with appreciation (the evocation variable noted above). As with affect and judgement, ideational meanings can be used to appraise, even though explicitly evaluative lexis is avoided. It perhaps should be stressed again here that appraisal analysts do need to declare their reading position, in particular since the evaluation one makes of evocations depends on the institutional position one is reading from. For example, according to reading position, formal and functional linguists will evaluate terms in the following sets of oppositions in complementary ways with firm convictions about what the good guys and the bad guys should celebrate:
rule/resource :: cognitive/social :: acquisition/development :: syntagmatic/paradigmatic :: form/function :: language/parole :: system/process :: psychology&philosophy/socioiogy&anthropology :: cognitive/social :: theory/description :: intuition/corpus :: knowledge/meaning :: syntax/discourse :: pragmatics/context :: parsimony/extravagance :: cognitive/critical :: technicist/humanist :: truth/social action :: performance/instantiation :: categorical/probabilistic :: contradictory/complementary :: proof/exemplification :: reductive/comprehensive :: arbitrary/natural :: modular/fractal :: syntax&lexicon/lexicogrammar...
Blogger Comments:
[1] As pointed out in the previous post, the notion of "coupling" of field with appreciation betrays the authors' misunderstanding of strata and metafunctions as interacting modules of meaning (Martin 1992: 390); see, for example Misconstruing Strata And Metafunctions As Modules.
[2] The notion that 'ideational meanings can be used to appraise' continues the misunderstanding of metafunctions as modules. The implication here is that the terms that enact explicit appraisals, such as 'disorganised', do not also serve an ideational function.
To be clear, the ideational metafunction is language in its function of construing experience as meaning, whereas the interpersonal metafunction is language in its function of enacting intersubjective relations as meaning. As an interpersonal system, appraisal is the enactment of intersubjective relations as meaning, not the use of "ideational" meanings to appraise.
[3] This confuses the reading position of the discourse analyst with the appraisals enacted in a text — the latter being either those of the author, or those reported by the author to be those of instantial participants.
[4] These proportionalities actually disclose the reading position of Martin & Rose. The following table sets out what the authors believe are appraised as positive by "the good guys and the bad guys":
What Formal Linguists Should
Celebrate
|
What Functional Linguists Should
Celebrate
|
rule
|
resource
|
cognitive
|
social
|
acquisition
|
development
|
syntagmatic
|
paradigmatic
|
form
|
function
|
language
|
parole
|
system
|
process
|
psychology & philosophy
|
socioiogy & anthropology
|
cognitive
|
social
|
theory
|
description
|
intuition
|
corpus
|
knowledge
|
meaning
|
syntax
|
discourse
|
pragmatics
|
context
|
parsimony
|
extravagance
|
cognitive
|
critical
|
technicist
|
humanist
|
truth
|
social action
|
performance
|
instantiation
|
categorical
|
probabilistic
|
contradictory
|
complementary
|
proof
|
exemplification
|
reductive
|
comprehensive
|
arbitrary
|
natural
|
modular
|
fractal
|
syntax & lexicon
|
lexicogrammar
|
No comments:
Post a Comment