Volume 35, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0213-2028
  • E-ISSN: 2254-6774
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes



This study compares two seminal speeches given by Boris Johnson in the context of Brexit. The first is from 2018 during his tenure as Foreign Secretary, and the second from 2020, by which time he had become Prime Minister. The transcripts of the two complete speeches together constitute a corpus of 7,270 words. The current study applies Hunston’s (200020082011) model of evaluation as a means of testing Johnson’s attitude towards the propositions he develops through his political oratory. Using the concepts of evaluation of status and value, this model allows us to identify Johnson’s degree of alignment with his representation of the world, and to perceive an ideological component in his choices here. It is hypothesized that the changes which took place in the political landscape in the time that separated the two speeches, a period of two years in which Johnson became Prime Minister and Britain left the European Union, may have had an effect on his use of evaluative language. The study reveals statistically significant findings. Johnson is found to have changed from contributing primarily world-creating propositional content in his 2018 speech to a more significant use of world-reflecting statements in his 2020 speech, and to rely in both speeches most importantly on himself as the source of information. The study also reveals a reluctance to display any hypothetical speech behaviour, and a strong preference for truth driven statements.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Aloy-Mayo, M. & Taboada, M.
    (2017) Evaluation in political discourse addressed to women: Appraisal analysis of Cosmopolitan’s online coverage of the 2014 midterm elections. Discourse, Context and Media, 18, 40–48. 10.1016/j.dcm.2017.06.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2017.06.003 [Google Scholar]
  2. Ananko, T.
    (2017) The category of evaluation in political discourse. Advanced Education, 8, 128–137. 10.20535/2410‑8286.108550
    https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.108550 [Google Scholar]
  3. Biber, D. & Finegan, E.
    (1989) Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text, 9(1), 93–124.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Billig, M.
    (1995) Banal nationalism. London: Sage.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Bloor, M. & Bloor, T.
    (2018) Systemic functional linguistics. InJ. Flowerdew & J. E. Richardson (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of critical discourse analysis (pp.151–164). New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Budd, K.
    (2015) Analysing political speeches: Rhetoric, discourse and metaphor. Critical Discourse Analysis, 13(1), 139–141. 10.1080/17405904.2015.1105420
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17405904.2015.1105420 [Google Scholar]
  7. Cabrejas-Peñuelas, A. B. & Díez-Prados, M.
    (2014) Positive self-evaluation versus negative other-evaluation in the political genre of pre-election debates. Discourse and Society, 25(2), 159–185. 10.1177/0957926513515601
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926513515601 [Google Scholar]
  8. Cabrejas-Peñuelas, A. B. & Dolón, R.
    (2021) Evaluation in Theresa May’s political discourse: A study of the PM’s seminal Brexit speeches. InM. Fuster-Márquez, J. Santaemilia, C. Gregori-Signes & P. Rodríguez-Abruñeiras (Eds.), Exploring discourse and ideology through corpora (pp.95–118). Bern: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Catalano, T.
    (2011) Barack Obama: A semiotic analysis of his Philadelphia speech. Political Discourse Analysis, 3(1), 47–74.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Chafe, W.
    (1986) Evidentiality in English conversation and academic writing. InW. Chafe & J. Nichols (Eds.). Evidentiality: The linguistic coding of epistemology (pp.261–272). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Charteris-Black, J.
    (2013) Analysing political speeches. Rhetoric, discourse and metaphor. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Chilton, P. & Schäffner, Ch.
    (Eds) (2002) Politics as text and talk: Analytic approaches to political discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/dapsac.4
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.4 [Google Scholar]
  13. Díez-Prados, M. & Cabrejas-Peñuelas, A. B.
    (2018) Evaluation of “status” as a persuasive tool in Spanish and American pre-electoral debates in times of crisis. Atlantis, 40(2), 169–195. 10.28914/Atlantis‑2018‑40.2.09
    https://doi.org/10.28914/Atlantis-2018-40.2.09 [Google Scholar]
  14. Dörnyei, Z.
    (2007) Research methods in Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Fairclough, N.
    (1995) Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language. London: Longman.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Fairclough, N. & Fairclough, I.
    (2012) Political discourse analysis: A method for advanced students. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Finlayson, A. & Martin, J.
    (2008) ‘It ain’t what you say …’: British political studies and the analysis of speech and rhetoric. Journal of British politics, 3, 445–64. 10.1057/bp.2008.21
    https://doi.org/10.1057/bp.2008.21 [Google Scholar]
  18. Gray, B. & Biber, D.
    (2012) Current conceptions of stance. InK. Hyland (Eds.), Stance and voice in written academic genres (pp.15–33). London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9781137030825_2
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137030825_2 [Google Scholar]
  19. Halliday, M. A. & Matthiessen, Ch. M.
    (2004) Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar. London: Edward Arnold.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Harmon, L.
    (2017) Political discourse as practical reasoning: A case study of a British Prime Minister candidate speech. Linguistics Beyond and Within, 3, 74–86. 10.31743/lingbaw.5651
    https://doi.org/10.31743/lingbaw.5651 [Google Scholar]
  21. Hillier, H.
    (2004) Analysing real texts: Research studies in modern English language. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1007/978‑1‑137‑05005‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-05005-2 [Google Scholar]
  22. Hunston, S.
    (2000) Evaluation and the planes of discourse: Status and value in persuasive texts. InS. Hunston & G. Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial status and the construction of discourse (pp.176–207). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. (2008) The evaluation of status in multi-modal texts. Functions of Language15(1), 64–83. 10.1075/fol.15.1.05hun
    https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.15.1.05hun [Google Scholar]
  24. (2011) Corpus approaches to evaluation: Phraseology and evaluative language. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Hunston, S. & Thompson, G.
    (Eds) (2000) Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Hyland, K.
    (2005) Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse. Discourse Studies, 7(2), 173–192. 10.1177/1461445605050365
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605050365 [Google Scholar]
  27. Lemke, J. L.
    (1998) Resources of attitudinal meaning: Evaluative orientation in text semantics. Functions of Language5(1), 33–56. 10.1075/fol.5.1.03lem
    https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.5.1.03lem [Google Scholar]
  28. Martin, J. R. & White, P. R.
    (2005) The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. London: Palgrave Macmillan. 10.1057/9780230511910
    https://doi.org/10.1057/9780230511910 [Google Scholar]
  29. O’Donnell, M.
    (2012) UAM Corpus Tool: Annotation for the 21st Century, atwww.corpustool.com/index.html
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Pinna, A.
    (2007) Evaluation and ideology in political discourse: The use of extended units of meaning centred on modal verbs in G.W. Bush’s presidential speeches. InG. Garzone & S. Sarangi (Eds.), Discourse, ideology and specialized communication (pp.433–452). Bern: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Ochs, E. & Schieffelin, B.
    (1989) Language has a heart. Text, 9(1), 7–25.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Polonska-Kimunguyi, E. & Kimunguyi, P.
    (2018) ‘Gunboats of soft power’: Boris on Africa and post-Brexit ‘global Britain’. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 30(4), 325–349. 10.1080/09557571.2018.1432565
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09557571.2018.1432565 [Google Scholar]
  33. Ponton, D. M.
    (2011) For argument’s sake: Speaker evaluation in modern political discourse. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Portner, P.
    (2009) Modality. London: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Rawlison, K. [Google Scholar]
  36. Savoy, J.
    (2010) Lexical analysis of US political speeches. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 17(2), 123–141. 10.1080/09296171003643205
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09296171003643205 [Google Scholar]
  37. Schaffner, Ch.
    (1996) Political speeches and discourse analysis. Current Issues in Language and Society, 3(3), 201–204.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Shayegh, K.
    (2012) Modality in political discourses of Barak Obama and Martin Luther King. Trends in Advanced Science and Engineering, 3(1), 2–8.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Simon-Vandenbergen, A. M.
    (2008) Hillary Clinton vs. Barack Obama: A linguistic study of Appraisal in political speeches. Master’s thesis, University of Ghent.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Smith, N.
    (2020) Boris Johnson says ‘no need’ for UK to follow EU rules of trade, athttps://www.bbc.com/news/uk-51351914
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Svensson, L.
    (2018) The European project: A comparative critical discourse analysis of three State of the Union speeches. PhD thesis, Lundt Universitet.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Swain, E.
    (2012) Analysing evaluation in political cartoons. Discourse, Context & Media, 1, 82–94. 10.1016/j.dcm.2012.09.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2012.09.002 [Google Scholar]
  43. The Guardian Editorial
    The Guardian Editorial (2018) The Guardian’s view of Boris Johnson’s Brexit vision: All about me, athttps://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/14/the-guardian-view-of-boris-johnsons-brexit-vision-all-about-me
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Thompson, G. & Hunston, S.
    (2000) Evaluation: An introduction. InS. Hunston & G. Thompson (Eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse (pp.1–27). New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Van Dijk, T. A.
    (1995) Discourse semantics and ideology. Discourse & Society, 6(2), 243–289. 10.1177/0957926595006002006
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926595006002006 [Google Scholar]
  46. (2002) Political discourse and political cognition. InP. Chilton & Ch. Schäffner (Eds.), Politics as text and talk: Analytic approaches to political discourse (pp.203–238). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/dapsac.4.11dij
    https://doi.org/10.1075/dapsac.4.11dij [Google Scholar]
  47. (2006) Ideology and discourse analysis. Journal of Political Ideologies, 11(2), 115–140. 10.1080/13569310600687908
    https://doi.org/10.1080/13569310600687908 [Google Scholar]
  48. White, P. R.
    (2003) Beyond modality and hedging: A dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance. Text, 23(2), 259–284.
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Wodak, R.
    (Ed) (1989) Language, power and ideology: Studies in political discourse. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Company. 10.1075/ct.7
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ct.7 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

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