1887
  1. Home
  2. e-Journals
  3. Language, Context and Text
  4. Volume 4, Issue 2
  5. Article
Volume 4, Issue 2
  • ISSN 2589-7233
  • E-ISSN: 2589-7241
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

The appraisal framework developed by Martin and White and others working within systemic functional linguistics has been applied in a wide variety of contexts. However, to our knowledge, it has been little used in the interpretation of ancient written documents. We believe that it may have value, amongst other things, in determining the genre of such literature and we see this as particularly relevant in the area of biography, where the author’s presentation of the subject is a key factor. So, in this study, we apply aspects of the appraisal framework to three Hellenistic Greek texts often categorised with the genre “Lives”. Selected passages from these texts were divided into short units for quantitative analysis that focused on the that the texts’ authors make of their central characters (their “heroes”), how this is and how they with different “voices”. These passages were also compared with the rest of the texts in a more qualitative study. Our results show notable differences in the the authors make and presumably wish their readers to share in terms of the positive/negative portrayal of their “heroes”, the degree of amplification and the interaction with other “voices”. We consider the appropriateness of the “Lives” genre for one of these texts, the , and also a number of methodological issues arising from an area of application that has not previously received attention. These include the difficulty of making clear-cut evaluation choices where authors themselves may be ambivalent about those they are describing and the need to take account of the differing and complex value systems of ancient cultures. We suggest that our findings may have wider relevance for other applications of appraisal.

© John Benjamins Publishing Company
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/langct.21015.lam
2022-09-29
2024-10-11

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1075/langct.21015.lam
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Beck, Mark
    2016 Lucian’s Life of Demonax: The Socratic paradigm, individuality, and personality. InKoen de Temmerman & Kristoffel Demoen (eds.), Writing biography in Greece and Rome: Narrative technique and fictionalization, 80–96. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781316422861.006
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316422861.006 [Google Scholar]
  2. Burridge, Richard A.
    2018 What are the Gospels? A comparison with Graeco-Roman biography (3rd edition). Waco, TX: Baylor University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Cortazzi, Martin & Lixian Jin
    2000 Evaluating evaluation in narrative. InSusan Hunston & Geoff Thompson (eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse, 102–120. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Duff, Tim
    1999 Plutarch’s lives: Exploring virtue and vice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Dvorak, James D.
    2021 The interpersonal metafunction in 1 Corinthians 1–4: The tenor of toughness. Leiden: Brill. 10.1163/9789004453814
     https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004453814 [Google Scholar]
  6. Eggins, Suzanne
    2004 An introduction to systemic functional linguistics (2nd edition). London: Continuum.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Eggins, Suzanne & Diana Slade
    1997 Analysing casual conversation. London: Equinox.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Fowler, Roger
    1996 Linguistic criticism (2nd edition). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Frost, Bryan-Paul
    1997 An interpretation of Plutarch’s ‘Cato the Younger’. History of Political Thought18 (1). 1–23.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Fuoli, Matteo
    2018 A stepwise method for annotating APPRAISAL. Functions of Language25 (2). 229–258. 10.1075/fol.15016.fuo
     https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.15016.fuo [Google Scholar]
  11. Goddard, Cliff, Maite Taboada & Radoslava Trnavac
    2019 The semantics of evaluational adjectives: Perspectives from natural semantic metalanguage and appraisal. Functions of Language26 (3). 308–342. 10.1075/fol.00029.god
     https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.00029.god [Google Scholar]
  12. Gospel of John 2012 InBarbara & Kurt Aland, Johannes Karavidopoulos, Carlo M. Martini & Bruce Metzger (eds.), Novum Testamentum Graece (28th revised edition), 292–377. Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Hägg, Thomas
    2012 The art of biography in antiquity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139061322
     https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139061322 [Google Scholar]
  14. Halliday, Michael A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen
    2014 Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203783771
     https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203783771 [Google Scholar]
  15. Lamb, David A.
    2014 Text, context and the Johannine community: A sociolinguistic analysis of the Johannine writings. London: Bloomsbury T & T Clark.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Louw, Johannes P. & Eugene A. Nida
    (eds.) 1989 Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament based on semantic domains (2volumes; 2nd edition). New York: United Bible Societies.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Lucian
    Lucian 1913 Demonax in volume 1 of The works of Lucian. Translated byAustin M. Harmon. Loeb Classical Library 14. London: Heinemann.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Macken-Horarik & Anne Isaac
    Macken-Horarik & Anne Isaac 2014 Appraising appraisal. InGeoff Thompson & Laura Alba-Juez (eds.), Evaluation in context, 67–92. Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins. 10.1075/pbns.242.04mac
     https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.242.04mac [Google Scholar]
  19. Martin, James R.
    1992 English text: System and structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/z.59
     https://doi.org/10.1075/z.59 [Google Scholar]
  20. Martin, James R. & Peter R. R. White
    2005 The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230511910
     https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230511910 [Google Scholar]
  21. Martin, James R. & David Rose
    2007 Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause (2nd edition). London: Bloomsbury.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Montari, Franco
    2015 The Brill dictionary of ancient Greek (English edition). Edited byMadeleine Goh & Chad Schroeder. Leiden: Brill.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Nacey, Susan, Aletta G. Dorst, Tina Krennmayr & W. Gudrun Reijnierse
    (eds) 2019 Metaphor identification in multiple languages: MIPVU around the world. (Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research 22). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/celcr.22
     https://doi.org/10.1075/celcr.22 [Google Scholar]
  24. Oteíza, Teresa
    2017 The appraisal framework and discourse analysis. InTom Bartlett & Gerard O’Grady (eds.), The Routledge handbook of systemic functional linguistics, 457–472. Abingdon/New York: Routledge.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Plutarch
    Plutarch 1919 Lives, volume 8: Sertorius and Eumenes. Phocion and Cato the Younger. Translated byBernadette Perrin. Loeb Classical Library 100. London: Heinemann.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Read, Jonathon & John Carroll
    2012 Annotating expressions of appraisal in English. Language Resources and Evaluation46. 421–47. 10.1007/s10579‑010‑9135‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s10579-010-9135-7 [Google Scholar]
  27. Smith, Justin Marc
    2015 Why Βίος? On the relationship between gospel genre and implied audience. London: Bloomsbury T & T Clark.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Tenbrink, Thora
    2020 Cognitive discourse analysis: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108525176
     https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108525176 [Google Scholar]
  29. Thompson, Geoff & Susan Hunston
    2000 Evaluation: An introduction. InSusan Hunston & Geoff Thompson (eds), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse, 1–27. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Tupala, Mira
    2019 Applying quantitative appraisal analysis to the study of institutional discourse: The case of EU migration documents. Functional Linguistics6 (2). 1–17. 10.1186/s40554‑018‑0067‑7
     https://doi.org/10.1186/s40554-018-0067-7 [Google Scholar]
  31. Wei, Yakun, Michael Wherrity & Yi Zhang
    2015 An analysis of current research on appraisal theory. Linguistics and Literature Studies3 (5). 235–39. 10.13189/lls.2015.030506
     https://doi.org/10.13189/lls.2015.030506 [Google Scholar]
  32. White, Peter R. R.
    Appraisal theory 2015 InKaren Tracey, Cornelia Ilie & Todd Sandel (eds.), The international encyclopaedia of language and social interaction: Volume1, 54–60. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. Retrieved on14 January 2022fromwww.prrwhite.info/prrwhite,%202015,%20Appraisal%20theory,%20Wiley%20Encylopedia.pdf
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/langct.21015.lam
Loading
Evaluating Jesus and other “heroes”
Language, Context and Text 4, 227 (2022); https://doi.org/10.1075/langct.21015.lam
/content/journals/10.1075/langct.21015.lam
/content/journals/10.1075/langct.21015.lam
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): ancient written texts; appraisal; biography; discourse analysis; evaluation; genre; Gospel of John; Hellenistic Greek “Lives”; inter-coder reliability; systemic functional linguistics

Most Cited

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error