A protocol for the annotation of evaluative stance and metaphor across four discourse genres

  1. Laura Hidalgo-Downing 1
  2. Paula Pérez-Sobrino 2
  3. Laura Filardo-Llamas 3
  4. Carmen Maíz-Arévalo 4
  5. Begoña Núñez-Perucha 4
  6. Alfonso Sánchez-Moya 4
  7. Julia T. Williams Camus 5
  1. 1 Universidad Autónoma de Madrid
    info

    Universidad Autónoma de Madrid

    Madrid, España

    ROR https://ror.org/01cby8j38

  2. 2 Universidad de La Rioja
    info

    Universidad de La Rioja

    Logroño, España

    ROR https://ror.org/0553yr311

  3. 3 Universidad de Valladolid
    info

    Universidad de Valladolid

    Valladolid, España

    ROR https://ror.org/01fvbaw18

  4. 4 Universidad Complutense de Madrid
    info

    Universidad Complutense de Madrid

    Madrid, España

    ROR 02p0gd045

  5. 5 Universidad de Cantabria
    info

    Universidad de Cantabria

    Santander, España

    ROR https://ror.org/046ffzj20

Mostrar afiliaciones +
Revista:
Revista española de lingüística aplicada

ISSN: 0213-2028

Año de publicación: 2024

Volumen: 37

Número: 2

Páginas: 486-517

Tipo: Artículo

beta Ver similares en nube de resultados
DOI: 10.1075/RESLA.21058.HID DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR

Otras publicaciones en: Revista española de lingüística aplicada

Resumen

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.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Alba-Juez, L. & G. Thompson (2014) The many faces and phases of evaluation. InG. Thompson & L. Alba-Juez (Eds.) Evaluation in context (pp.3–24). John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.242.01alb https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.242.01alb
  • Bednarek, M. (2009) Language patterns and ATTITUDE. Functions of Language, 16(2), 165–192. 10.1075/fol.16.2.01bed https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.16.2.01bed
  • Bednarek, M., & Caple, H. (2014) Why do news values matter? Towards a new methodological framework for analysing news discourse in Critical Discourse Analysis and beyond. Discourse & Society, 25(2), 135–158. 10.1177/0957926513516041 https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926513516041
  • Biber, D., Johansson, S., Leech, G., Conrad, S., & Finegan, E. (1999) Longman grammar of spoken and written English. Longman Pearson.
  • Deignan, A. (2010) The evaluative properties of metaphors. InG. Low, Z. Todd, A. Deignan, & L. Cameron (Eds.) Researching and applying metaphor in the real world (pp.357–374). John Benjamins. 10.1075/hcp.26.21dei https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.26.21dei
  • Du Bois, J. W. (2007) The stance triangle. InR. Englebretson (Ed.) Stancetaking in discourse (pp.139–182). John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.164.07du https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.164.07du
  • Englebretson, R. (Ed.) (2007) Stancetaking in discourse. John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.164 https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.164
  • Fuoli, M. (2018) A stepwise method for annotating Appraisal. Functions of Language, 25(2), 229–258. 10.1075/fol.15016.fuo https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.15016.fuo
  • Fuoli, M., & Hommerberg, C. (2015) Optimising transparency, reliability and replicability: Annotation principles and inter-coder agreement in the quantification of evaluative expressions. Corpora, 10(3), 315–349. 10.3366/cor.2015.0080 https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2015.0080
  • Fuoli, M., Littlemore, J., & Turner, S. (2021) Sunken ships and screaming banshees: Metaphor and evaluation in film reviews. English Language and Linguistics, 26(1), 1–29. 10.1017/S1360674321000046 https://doi.org/10.1017/S1360674321000046
  • Hidalgo-Downing, L. (2016) Grammar and evaluation. InC. Chapelle (Ed.) The Applied Linguistics Encyclopedia. Online publication. [Accessed2 October 2021].
  • Hidalgo-Downing, L., & Pérez-Sobrino, P. (2022) Developing an annotation protocol for evaluative stance and metaphor in discourse: Theoretical and methodological considerations. Text and Talk. Advanced online publication. 10.1515/text‑2021‑0096 https://doi.org/10.1515/text-2021-0096
  • (2023) ‘Pushing Britain off the precipice’: A CDA approach to negative evaluative stance in opinion articles on Brexit. InJ. Marín-Arrese, L. Hidalgo-Downing, & J. R. Zamorano Mansilla (Eds.) Stance, inter/subjectivity and identity in discourse (pp.201–226). Peter Lang.
  • Hidalgo Tenorio, E., & Benítez Castro, M. Á. (2020) The language of evaluation in the narratives by the Magdalene laundries survivors: The discourse of female victimhood. Applied Linguistics, 42(2), 315–341. 10.1093/applin/amaa029 https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amaa029
  • Hunston, S. (2007) Using a corpus to investigate stance quantitatively and qualitatively. InR. Englebretson (Ed.) Stancetaking in discourse (pp.27–48). John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.164.03hun https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.164.03hun
  • (2011) Corpus Approaches to Evaluation. Phraseology and Evaluative Language. Routledge.
  • Hunston, S., & Su, H. (2019) Patterns, constructions, and local grammar: A case study of evaluation. Applied Linguistics, 40(4), 567–593. 10.1093/applin/amx046 https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amx046
  • Hunston, S., & Thompson, G. (2000) Evaluation in text. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198238546.001.0001 https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198238546.001.0001
  • Jaki, S., De Smedt, T., Gwóźdź, M., Panchal, R., Rossa, A., & De Pauw, G. (2019) Online hatred of women in the Incels. me forum: Linguistic analysis and automatic detection. Journal of Language Aggression and Conflict, 7(2), 240–268. 10.1075/jlac.00026.jak https://doi.org/10.1075/jlac.00026.jak
  • Lorenzo-Dus, N., & Nouri, L. (2020) The discourse of the US alt-right online–a case study of the Traditionalist Worker Party blog. Critical Discourse Studies, 18(4), 1–19.
  • Maíz-Arévalo, C., & Sánchez-Moya, A. (2023) “Histrionic, appalling, a major turkey”: The expression of evaluative stance in the discourse of online forums. InJ. Marín Arrese, L. Hidalgo-Downing, & J. R. Zamorano Mansilla (Eds.) Stance, inter/subjectivity and identity in discourse (pp.249–269). Peter Lang.
  • Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. R. (2005) The language of evaluation. Appraisal in English. Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230511910 https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230511910
  • Núñez-Perucha, B., & Filardo-Llamas, L. (2023) From “roaring lion” to “chlorinated chicken”: Evaluative stance and ideological positioning in a corpus of British political discourse. InJ. Marín-Arrese, L. Hidalgo-Downing, & J. R. Zamorano Mansilla (Eds.) Stance, inter/subjectivity and identity in discourse (pp.227–248). Peter Lang.
  • Pragglejazz Group Pragglejazz Group (2007) A method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 1–39. 10.1080/10926480709336752 https://doi.org/10.1080/10926480709336752
  • Prażmo, E. (2020) Foids are worse than animals. A cognitive linguistics analysis of dehumanizing metaphors in online discourse. Topics in Linguistics, 21(2), 16–27. 10.2478/topling‑2020‑0007 https://doi.org/10.2478/topling-2020-0007
  • Read, J., & Carroll, J. (2012) Annotating expressions of Appraisal in English. Language Resources and Evaluation, 46(3), 421–447. 10.1007/s10579‑010‑9135‑7 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-010-9135-7
  • Simaki, V., Paradis, C., & Kerren, A. (2018) Evaluating stance-annotated sentences from the Brexit Blog Corpus: A quantitative linguistic analysis. ICAME journal, 42(1), 133–166. 10.1515/icame‑2018‑0007 https://doi.org/10.1515/icame-2018-0007
  • Simaki, V., Paradis, C., Skeppstedt, M., Sahlgren, M., Kucher, K., & Kerren, A. (2020) Annotating speaker stance in discourse: The Brexit Blog Corpus. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 16(2), 215–248.
  • Steen, G., Dorst, Aletta G., Herrmann, J. B., Kaal, A. A., & Krennmayr, T. (2010) Metaphor in usage. Cognitive Linguistics, 21(4), 765–796. 10.1515/cogl.2010.024 https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2010.024
  • Taboada, M., & Carretero, M. (2010) Contrastive analyses of evaluation in text: Key issues in the design of an annotation system for attitude applicable to consumer reviews in English and Spanish. Linguistics and the Human Sciences, 6(1–3), 275–295. 10.1558/lhs.v6i1‑3.275 https://doi.org/10.1558/lhs.v6i1-3.275
  • Thompson, G. (2014) Affect and emotion, target-value mismatches, and Russian dolls: Refining the appraisal model. InL. Alba-Juez, & G. Thompson (Eds.) Evaluation in context (pp.47–66). John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.242.03tho https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.242.03tho
  • Van Dijk, T. A. (1995) Power and the news media. InD. L. Paletz (Ed.) Political communication and action (pp.9–36). Hampton Press.
  • van Leeuwen, T. (2008) Discourse and Practice: New Tools for Critical Discourse Analysis. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195323306.001.0001 https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195323306.001.0001
  • Williams Camus, J. T. (2023) Evaluative stance in science popularisations in the English press. InJ. Marín-Arrese, L. Hidalgo-Downing, & J. R. Zamorano Mansilla (eds.) Stance, inter/subjectivity and identity in discourse (pp.271–293). Peter Lang.
  • Wodak, R. & M. Meyer (Eds.) (2015) Methods of Critical Discourse Studies. Sage.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet