近畿大学学術情報リポジトリ

全文

(1)AnalysingPowerDistribution. . 1n. aCurrentAffairsInterview Ajournalistandapoliceman. AndrewAtkins. 1.OIntroduction Thisstudyinvestigatedhowpowerwasdistributedbetweenthe participantsofacurrentaffairstelevisioninterviewwhenoneparticipant wasan"ordinaryperson"(Carpentier&Hannot,2009)andtheotheran experiencedjournalist.Itwouldperhapsbeassumedbymanypeoplethat inatelevisioninterviewofthistype,thepowerwouldresidewiththe interviewerwhocontrolsthedirectionofthediscourse.However,if "k nowledgeispower"(Bacon,1597)thentheinterviewee,evenwithless familiaritywiththegenre,willalsohaveagoodshareofthepower, especiallyiftheyareanexpertguest,orasinthetextstudiedinthis paper,talkingabouteventsconcerningtheirownlife.Theunseenaudience, whohavethepowertochangechannelsoreventurnofFthetelevision, mustalsobeconsideredashavingpowerbybothinteractants. InallforrnsofcornrnunicationtherernustbeaperceiveddifFerence orthecommunicationwouldnottakeplace.Kress(1985)suggests,"Most speechgenresareostensiblyaboutdifference:argument(differencesofan. [100]. (1).

(2) ideologicalkind),interview(differencesaboutpowerandknowledge), ` gossip'(differencearoundinformalknowledge)"(p.15).Thispaper examinestheextenttowhichpowerandknowledgeinfluencethe proceedingsandhowpoweriscreatedbyknowledgeandnotonlycontrol. Itwaspossibletoidentifybymethodicalanalysisofthetexthowthe differenceswererealised.Thepowerrelationshipbetweenparticipantsis broughttotheinterviewandalsocreatedastheinterviewunfolds.Life history,socialclass,education,mediaexperience,perceivedrole,tonamea few,arerelevanttothecoursetheinterviewtakes,andwillhaveaneffect onthediscourseproducedbythepartiesinvolved.. 1.1TheHallidayanmodelofIanguage Theanalysisdescribedinthispaperhasevolvedprimarilyfromthe thoughtsandideasofMichaelHalliday(1985,1994),anditisappropriate atthisstagetooutlinetheHallidayanmodeloflanguageandattemptto definesomeoftheterminologythataccompaniesthemodel.Themodel wasbuiltuponFirth's(1957a,b)developmentofMalinowski's(1923,1935) conceptsofcoη'6κ'ρ. ∫sガ魏 α'ゴoηandoo漉2鉱. ρ∫6z〃'z〃6。Figurelisa. representationofthemodeladaptedfromDerewianka(2001).Itshows thewayinwhichatextiscreatedfromcoπ s髭z4αガoπandthe1α. 嬬'(ゾo%伽76,co窺6撹(ゾ. πgz4㎎6ミys陀. 〃z。. Figure1.-TheHallidayanmodeloflanguage CONTEXTof CULTURE. ノ /●socialCONTEXTof. SITUATION ●setsofbehef§. ＼ FIELDLANGUAGE. .、。,i、1＼. 、Y、T、M. ＼ .、。ci、lTEN°R一. (2). の棚 πo崩五レ. [99].

(3) Coπ6κ. オ〔ゾ6π. 伽76isexplainedbyHallidayandHasan(1985)who. defineitintermsofcontextofsituation: anyactualcontextofsituation,theparticularconfigurationoffield, tenorandmodethathasbroughtthetextintobeing,notjusta randomjumbleoffeaturesbutatotality-apackage,sotospeak,of thingsthattypicallygotogetherintheculture.Peopledothese thingsontheseoccasionsandattachthesemeaningstothem;thisis whatcultureis。(p.46) Co漉. 鉱(ゾs磁. α'ゴoκisexplainedbyMartin(2001),-Fガ6♂4-"refersto. whatisgoingon,wherewhatisgoingonisinterpretedinstitutionally,in termsofsomeculturallyrecognisedactivity._Examplesoffieldsare activitiessuchastennis,opera,linguistics...Whenpeopleaskyouwhatyou dowhenfirstgettingtoknowyou,youtendtoanswerintermsoffield." (pp.152-153)乃. π07-"Tenorreferstothewayyourelatetootherpeople. whendoingwhatyoudo.Oneaspectoftenorisstatus_peoplehave poweroveroneanother!'(p.153).M∂. 磁. 一"Modereferstothechannelyou. selecttocommunicate...speechandwriting_e-mail,telephone,radio, television,video,filmandsoon."(p.153).Forthepurposesofthispaper, tenorwasofmostsignificanceasitisconcernedwiththepowerand statusoftheparticipants.. 1.2Characteristicsofajournalisticinterview Kress(1985)providessomeusefulinsightintothecharacteristicsof aninterview:"theinterviewisovertlymotivatedbydifFerence,andisnot developedbyàgreement'butby`direction'.Thetextualstrategiesare directionandquestioningonthepartoftheinterviewer,andresponse, information,anddefinition,onthepartoftheinterviewee."(p.23).In summation,thereisadifferenceinpowerandadifferenceinknowledge. Thebasicfeaturesofthetelevisioninterview(Ekstr6m,2001)are. [98]. (3).

(4) thattheformalneutralpositionoftheinterviewerismanifestedby"the avoidanceofspeakinginthefirstperson(T)andintheinterviewer's movingontothenextquestionoranentirelynewsubject-without evaluatingorcommentingontheinterviewee'sanswertothepreceding question."(p.565).Theviewthattheinterviewerisneutralseemstobe rathernaiveastherearealternativeoptionsavailabletotheinterviewer bywhichthedirectionoftheinterviewcanbecontrolled.Theaudience,. presentinthestudio,orsatonthesofaathome,arethemainreasonfor thebroadcast。Theinterviewerisactingasagentforeachperson watching,tryingtouncoveranytitbitsofnewsontheirbehalf.. 1.2.1Authenticity Montgomery(2001)impliesthatmuchofwhatweseeontelevision interviewsisscripted,turnspre-allocatedandthedirectionsoftalk plannedinadvance.Thisisnotthecasewiththe`HARDtalk'interview,as noneofthesethingsaretrueaccordingtotheinterviewee,GurpalVirdi (personalcommunication).Theprogrammeappearstobeauthentic becauseitisunpredictableandappearsspontaneous.Thornborrowand VanLeeuwen(2001)explain"lnterviewingpracticesrestuponthenotion thatspontaneityguaranteestruth,oratleastahighdegreeof accountability,whilescriptedandpre-meditatedtalkdoesnot."(p.387).. 1.3Discourseanalysis Anumberofpotentialmethodsandapproachesforanalyzingthe textwereconsideredincluding;ConversationAnalysis(CA),Critical DiscourseAnalysis(CDA),andsocalledBirminghamDiscourseAnalysis, butthesewererejectedinfavourofanapproachsuggestedbyEgginsand Slade(2004)thattheyterm"aneclecticapproach"(p.23).Although originallydesignedtodealwiththecomplexitiesofcasualconversation,it. (4). [97].

(5) providesaveryrichanalysisofcomplextextssuchasinterviews.The approachhasthreemainstagesofanalysis,whichrespectivelylookat threedifferentlevelsofdiscourse:moodchoiceatthelexico-grammatical level,Appraisalanalysisatthesemanticlevelandexchangestructure analysisatthe"discourse"level.. 1.3.1Semanticanalysis Appraisalanalysis,atthediscoursesemanticlevel,addresseshow interpersonalmeaningsareconstructedwithinatextandbetweenthe. participants.Itisusedtoexaminethedifferentvalueswithinatextthat worktocreateinterpersonalmeanings.ノ4ヵ. 〃. αガsαZisthesuper-ordinate. term,whichissubdividedintoATTITUDE,GRADUATIONand ENGAGEMENT.ATTITUDEisfurthersubdividedintoル4g翻 and∠4、. 例. ち.4茄c'. 毎)7θcゴα'ガ07z. Thefirstdescriptionofvaluesofμ496辮. θ沈wasinIedema,Feez&. White(1994)inwhichtheyarecategorisedasassessmentsofhuman behaviourbyreferencetosocialnorms.∠. 喚c'itemsaredescribedasbeing. thosethatdescribethespeaker'sattitudetowardsemotionalstates。Values of4旋o',likeallATTITUDEitemsmaybepositiveornegativeintheir evaluation。Valuesof.41励. ノ6c磁. ガoηaredennedbyWhite(2001)asthose. thatrefertothespeaker's"evaluationofobjectsandproducts...by referencetoaestheticprinciplesandothersystemsofsocialvalue."(p.6). GRADUATIONisde且nedbyWhite(2002)as"Valuesbywhich(1) speakersgraduate(raiseorlower)theinterpersonalimpact,forceor volumeoftheirutterances,and(2)bywhichtheygraduate(bluror sharpen)thefocusoftheirsernanticcategorisations."(P.2). ThefinalcategoryisthatofENGAGEMENT,whichEgginsand Slade(2004)termINVOLVEMENT.White(2001)describesvaluesof ENGAGEMENTasthosethatare"concernedwiththelinguisticresources. [96]. (5).

(6) whichexplicitlypositionatext'sproposalsandpositionsinter-subjectively." (P.9). 1.4ResearchQuestions l.Howisthebalanceofpowerrealisedinmicrolinguisticterms? 2.Whatfactorscanbeidentinedasaffectingthispowersharing?. 2.OMethods Thissectiondescribesthemethodsusedinthestudy.. 2.1Text FivedifFerent`HARDtalk'programsarebroadcastperweek,with eachprogramrepeatedfourtimes.15episodeswererecordedstarting21st January2002.TheinterviewwithGurpalVirdiwaschosen,ashewasthe leastexperiencedwiththemedia. ThecodingsystemfortranscriptiondescribedinEgginsandSlade (2004)providedaclearmeansofencodingoverlappingspeech.The且rst eightyturnsatspeechwerechosen,providingmorethanonehundred clausesfromeachspeaker,andthebeginningoftheinterviewwasthought tobemostimportantforthenegotiationofpower.. 2.2Lexico-grammaticalAnalysis Generally,codingmoodchoicewasunproblematic,althoughellipsis andabandonmentwereinsomecasesproblematic.Theareawheremost careneededtobetakenwasthatofidentifyingminorclauses,especially withregardtotheword`yes'.Insomecasestheword`yes'functionedas a嬬. 伽 αZα ψ'媚6'andinothersitformeda癬. π0761α%∫6.A珈. doesnothaveamoodstructureandisoftenformulaic,generally functioningasapreludetonegotiation.Itwasnecessarytolistentothe. (6). [95]. η076Zα. πs6.

(7) AppendixC-SummaryoftheExchangeStructureAnalysis Speechfunction. TimSebastian. GurpalVirdi. nurnberofturns. 41. 39. nurnberofrnoves. 69. 123. nurnberofclauses. 104(4). 180(17). Open attending:salutation. 1. questlon:oplnlon. 2. question:fact. 4. state:oplnlon. 1. state:fact. 8. total. 16. Continue prolong:elaborate. 10. 25. prolong:extend. 9. 36 15. Prolong:enhance apPend:elaborate. 1. apPend:extend. 3. total. 23. 76. React:responding engage. 1. reglster. 5. develoP:elaborate. 1. develoP:extend. 1. replying:supPorting. 26. replying:confronting. 9. total. 43. React:rejoinder tracking:clarify. 5. [74]. (27).

(8) recordingnumeroustimesbeforealloftheseitemswerecorrectlycoded. `N o'anditsderivativesarecodedaseithera彪癬. κ'繊 ♂coπ. 切%勿. 〃zαノ々670ra. π07cZ朋s6usingthesamecriteriaasforツ6s. Negationwasalsonotedandadjunctswereidentified.Negationsare. importantastheycansignalaninteractant'spositiontowardsasubject. Adjunctsaredefinedas(Eggins&Slade,2004)"notpivotaltotheclause ..[and]elementswhichcannotbemadesubject"(p.81).Theseadjuncts werenotedandclassifiedintothreecategories:6ガ7cπ 露6ゆ67soκ. α1and敵'%α. 規s'α. 厩ゴα1,. θα傭. ∠励c'. ♂,ontoacodingsheet,asummaryofwhichis. attachedasAppendixA,forreferencepurposes.Inthefirstinstance,only thetranscriptwasusedtocodethedata,butitwasthencheckedagainst therecordingandanumberofitemsre-coded.. 2.3SemanticAnalysis ThefirststageoftheAppraisalanalysiswastoidentifyallofthe Appraisalitemsinthetext.AnAppraisalitemwasdefinedasanyitem thatcarriedsomedegreeofinterpersonalmeaning,expressingattitude towardstheworldortheotherparticipantinthetext.Martin(2000) offersfurtherdefinitionofthetermAppraisal,as`thesemanticresources usedtonegotiateemotions,judgements,andvaluations,alongsideresources foramplifyingandengagingwiththeseevaluations.'(p.145). ∠晩6'itemsarecategorisedasoneoftwomaintypes:〃 and76αZガ. ∫ ∠晩c乙. 〃76α. 」ガ ∫4〃. 乙c'isconcernedwiththefutureandunrealised. actionsand(White,2000)`statesratherthanpresentones!(p.150).Ithas onlyonesub-category,6Zガ. ∫/ゼηcZガ παだoπ,butcanbepositiveornegative.. R6αZガsAffectvaluescanbedescribedasreactionstoastimulus,andhave threesub-categories,whichare:瑚/%砂. μ. 麗 ∬,吻/∫. 召cπ7産yand漉s/. ∫αが吻c'ガoπ.Againthesevaluescanbepositiveornegative. Un/happinessisshowninclause(ii)intheexamplebelow:. [94]. (7).

(9) 19GV:(i)At,atthetimeIwasn'tbitteratall.(ii)ImeanIwas quitehappywithmycareer.(iii)Ahthese== Theterm"Happy"couldbeinterpretedasbelongingtothe4ガ. ∫/. ∫αガ吻c'ガoηsub-category,asitisambiguouswhetherbeinghappywitha jobismorecloselyrelatedto漉s冷 wascodedasan観. αガ吻6'ガoκor襯. 茄砂ヵ伽ss.However,it. 漉砂 ρ加6s∫itemasitseemedtoberelatedto観/. 加 ρρ吻6∬.B読67(c♂. 微 ∫6(の),isamuchmoresemanticallyslipPery. concept.B癖67seemstobesynonymouswithanger,andEgginsandSlade (2004)statethat襯. 漉砂 ρガ麗 ∬is"whenspeakersencodefeelingstodo. withsadness,朋g67,happinessorlove"(p.129).IncontrasttothisMartin &White(2005)listangerunderthesub-categoryof4ガs加'ガ furthersubcategory,漉. 吻c'加ina. ∫ヵZ6α∫π76.AsEgginsandSlade(2004)isless. detailedthanMartin'sworkandasMartinseemstobewidely acknowledgedastheauthorityonAppraisalanalysis,itwasdecidedto codebitterasanitemofゴ Tablel-%%洗. ガ∫冷 α距吻c'ゴ07z,asshownbelowintable1.. α勿加6∬ 溜ガ∫漁 α'ガ吻6'ガoπ. Turn/. exical. AppraisedCategorySubcategory. it・m鴇:. ,p,akerClause. ・-. 19/GV. Positive/L. ■1 ■1. bitter. negatlve. happy. posltlve. 1 (Gurpal) 1 (Gurpal). Affect. Affect. Martin(2000)providesaframeworkforanalysingノ. dis/ satisfaction un/hapPiness. 厩g6耀. 雇in. English,inwhichheoutlinestwosub-categoriesthatcontainfivesubcategoriesofノ thesocガ. αZ6s瘤. 勿496辮. 朋'intotal.Thethreesub-categoriesthatcomeunder. 窺umbrellaare:η07規. remainingtwosub-categoriesofsocガ. αZめノ,α ψ σcめ α♂∫砺c'ガoπare:麗zα6め. Allcategoriescontainbothpositiveandnegativevalues(seeMartin2000).. (8). [93]. ノand,'例. αo勿.The ノandρ7qρ7ガ. の..

(10) 8TS:(i)Butyoustillwantafullpublicinquiry,don'tyou? 9GV:(i)Yes.(ii)Ido,yes.(iii)Theseculpritsneedtobebrought tOJustlce. 10TS:(i)Theculpritswhosenttheracisthatemail? 11GV:(i)Theculpritswhosenttheracisthatemail(ii)andthe. peoplewhocoveredupforthem. Turnsatspeech8-11aboveprovidedoneofthemostproblematic nominalgroupstocodein"racisthatemail"。"Racist"and"hate"were codedastermsof伽496膨. πinthesub-categoryofヵ70ヵ7ガ. の(彫9α'z麗).. Hateseemstobeanegativeemotion,anditisnotreallyqualifyingthe mailitself,buttheemotionsexpressedthroughit.Thetermhatewhen collocatedwithmailseemstoassumeavolitionalactionbyahumanagent. Itfollowsthatthisrationalecanalsobeappliedtotheterm``racist". ThethirdcategoryofATTITUDEisthatof.41功766ガ. αがoη,butfew. itemswerepresentinthetext.Martin(2000)suggeststhat.4ρ. ρ7θc磁. 翻. isoftentiedupwith万6Zゴ,andtendstobeinstitutionallyspecific. GRADUATIONwasthenextareacoded.GRADUATIONmanifests itselfinmanylexico-grammaticalformsallofwhichserve,accordingto White(2002a)to"scaleothermeaningsalongtwopossibleparameterseitherlocatingthemonascalefromlowtohighintensity,orfromcoreto marginalmembershipofacategory."(p.29). EgginsandSlade(2004)identifythreesub-categoriesof AMPLIFICATION:例7ゴc乃. 耀. 厩,which"involvesaspeakeraddingan. additionalcolouringtoameaningwhenacore,neutralwordcouldbe used."(p.134);∠t%g規 meaning"(p.134);andルf漉gα. 朋. 励g,which"involvesamplifyingattitudinal オガoπ,whichattempts,asitsuggests,to. mitigateattitudinalmeaning.AMPLIFICATIONitemswereallocatedto EgginsandSlade's(2004)triadicsub-categoriesasthisprovidedareadily accessibledistinctionbetweenitems.Allthreecategorieswereusedby. [92]. (9).

(11) bothinteractants,andexamplesarenumerous.Eπ7ゴ. 爾. 辮6πwasatfirst. themostslipperycategorytoidentify.Inthiscasetheterm"acorrosive effect"wouldbemuchlessamplifyingiftheneutralterm"aneffect"were usedinitsplace. 38TS:(viii)ItMUSThaveacorrosiveeffectonyou,doesn'tit, afterawhile? AMPLIFICATION:催g耀. 漉. ηgitemswerethemostcommonly. usedAMPLIFICATIONitems,andtherearemorethanthirtyexamples inthetext.Itemswerecodedasα%g規. 佛. 伽giftheywereamplifiedusing. whathavetypicallybeencalled"ìntensi且ers'àmplifiers'andèmphatics'" (White,2002b,p.29).Twooftheclausesusingα%g耀. 刎吻gitemsare. shownbelow. 2TS:(i)GurpalVirdi,averywarmwelcometotheprogramme. 3GV:(i)Thankyouverymuch,Tim. Theuseoftheterms"very"and"verymuch"are催g辮. θ漉. warmthofthewelcome,andintensityofthethankyou..4㎎. πgthe. 鯛醜伽gitems. alsotaketheformofrepetitioninsomecases,insteadofaquantifier,as thistheexamplebelowshows. 38TS:(vi)You'reputtinginforapplicationafterapplication,job afterjob,courseaftercourse, 37GV:(iv)Iappliedforadrivingcourse,justaSIMPLE,BASIC, drivingcourse. Intheexampleabove,"just"isemphasisingthelackofcomplexityin thedrivingcourse,andassuchwascodedasα%g規. 朋. 伽g.Theterms. `SIMPLE'and`BASIC'seemtohavemoredepthtotheirpurpose ,and werecodedasboth加'忽. α々oηand例7ゴ. 酌辮6窺items.Thiskindofdual. codingissaidtobeacceptablebyWhite(2002). Anotherwayinwhichevaluationscanbe規 `vaguetalk'. (10). ガ'ガ即. ,whichalsoprovidesawaytolowertheintensityofan. [91]. ホ6ゴisbytheuseof.

(12) evaluationbymakingitlessprecise. 64TS:(iv)youweresortof,moreorlessresignedwithyourLOT, atthattime. Thetwoexamplesof"vaguelanguage"above,showhowtwo 纏'ガg読oπitemsareusedtogetherto"lower[s]thescalingofintensity" (White,2002b,p。29)ofTim'ssummaryofGurpal'sfeelingsofresignation。 INVOLVEMENT/ENGAGEMENTwasthefinalsystemtobe addressedinthediscoursesemanticanalysis.INVOLVEMENTisnot usuallyclassedaspartoftheAppraisalsystem,butcanbeusedtoidentify valuesofENGAGEMENT,whicharepartoftheAppraisalsystem.Eggins andSlade(2004)defineINVOLVEMENTas"thenamegiventoarange ofsemanticsystemswhichofferinteractantswaystorealize,construct andvarythelevelofintimacyofaninteraction"(p.143).EgginsandSlade (2004)listfoursubsystemsofINVOLVEMENT,whichare:"`π 彪c乃 π ガ6αZ徒y∫szo6α7ゴ. ノz9/51α η907α. α謝 πが一♂ απgz6㎎. θ"(p.144).Only"π. πg';. α〃z加g"is. usedinthetext.Inthecaseoftwopartytalk,namingistermeda redundantvocative,asitisunnecessarybecausethereareonlytwopeople intheinterview,meaningtheymustbeaddressingeachother.Thismay beseenas(Eggins&Slade,2004)"anattemptbytheaddresserto establishacloserrelationshipwiththeaddressee"(p.145),ineffect,an attempttocreatesomekindofsolidarity.Ofthetreeinstancesof``naming" inthetexttwocomeatthestartoftheinterviewinturnstwoandthree. 2TS:(i)GurpalVirdi,averywarmwelcometotheprogramme. 3GV:(i)Thankyouverymuch,Tim.(ii)It'stakenayear==and abit. ItapPearsthatbothofthevocativesusedservethepurposeof establishingacloserrelationshipbetweentheinteractants,andtheywere codedasbeingInvolvementitems.However,Tim'suseofGurparsfull name,addressinghimas"GurpalVirdi",servesthatthepurposeof. [90]. (11).

(13) introducingGurpaltotheaudience.Theothervocativeusedisinturn55. 55,GV:(iii)Let'sjust,(iv)let'sjustmakeonethingclear,Tim,(v) beforewetalkaboutthis. Thisalsocouldbeconstruedasanattemptatestablishingacloser relationship,andwasthuscodedasINVOLVEMENTasitappearstobe tryingtocreateasenseofsolidarity.. 2.4ExchangeStructureAnalysis Althoughothermethodswereconsidered,EgginsandSlade's(2004) frameworkwaschosenasthemostcomplementarytothepreviousstages andsuitableforassessingtheeffectsofcontextonregister.Themethods ofanalysisaredescribedindetailinChapter50fEgginsandSlade(2004, pp.169-225).Themodelhasforty-fourpossiblespeechfunctioncodings, andspacepreventsdescriptioninanydetail.Themodelisusedtoseparate thetextintomovesofvariousnatures,andthesemovesarethenfurther dividedintospeechfunctions. The且rststepoftheanalysiswastoidentifythemoves.Movesare toalargeextentdependantongrammaticalmood,butdonotcorrespond onaone-to-onebasisbecauseprosodicfactorshaveaninfluence。Theend ofamovewasdefinedbyapointofpossibleturntransfer,thatis,aplace whereaspeakercouldstop.. 3.OFindings 3.11nitialAnalysis Therearenumerousaspectsofasituationthathaveaninfluenceon thelanguageandproceedingsofanycommunicativeevent.Someofthese aspectsaremoreobviousthanotherstoparticipantsandonlookersalike. Holborow(1991,pp.26-27)providesuswithalistofsixfactorsthathelps toinitiallyassessthecontextofsituation:. (12). [89].

(14) 1Setting; 2Topic/subject/theme; 3Activity/activitiesofspeechparticipants; 4Addressor/addresseeidentities(social,personal,age,sex,etc.); 5Addressor/addresseerelationships(boss/employee,mother/child, teacher/student,etc.); 6Socio-culturalcontext。 Thesettinginthecaseofthispaperisthetelevisionstudio.This settingismuchmorefamiliartoTim,asatelevisioninterviewer,thanto Gurpalasapoliceo」. 堕cer.Gurpaldidhavesomeexperienceoftelevision. interviewsbeforethisone. Thegeneralthemeoftheinterviewwasracism,andalmostentirely aboutGurpal'sownexperienceofracismwithintheMetropolitanPolice Service.ThisgivesGurpalwhatVanLeeuwen(2001)callshis"symbolic value"(p.393)asthatofavictimofracism. Theactivitiesoftheparticipantsdifferedgreatly.Insimpleterms, TimaskedallthequestionsandGurpalprovidedtheanswers.The participantshowevermayhavesharedsimilargoals,inthattheywished toinformtheviewingpublicaboutGurpal'ssituation. TimSebastian:Atthetimeoftheinterview,Timwas50yearsold. Inhiscareerasajournalist,hehadbeenawardedanumberofhonours andawards.HehadbeenaforeigncorrespondentfortheBBCinWarsaw, MoscowandWashingtonandhadwrittensixnovelsandtwonon一. 且ction. books.HealsospeaksGermanandRussianandholdsadegreeinModern LanguagesfromOxfordUniversity.For`HARDtalk',Timinterviewed. peoplefromallwalksoflife,rangingfromkingstopolicemen. GurpalVirdi:Atthetimeoftheinterview,Gurpalwas43yearsold. HewasasergeantintheMetropolitanPoliceService.Heholdsamaster's degreeinLawandspeaksfourlanguages:English,Hindi,Punjabiand. [88]. (13).

(15) Urdu.Beforeappearingontheprogrammeherecallsseeingittwicewhilst onholiday.HealsorememberedTimfromhisdaysasaforeign correspondentandadmitstohavingbeenverynervousbeforethe interview.Commentingonhisreasonsforappearingontheprogramme, Gurpal(personalcorrespondence,28thAugust2002)said"thetruthneed [ed]tobebroughtoutintothepublicdomain。" Theinterviewer-intervieweerelationshipcarrieswithitcertain rulesandexpectedpatternsofbehaviour.Theinterviewerisexpectedto controlanddirecttheproceedingsandtheintervieweeisexpectedtocooperatewiththeinterviewerandanswerthegivenquestions. Thesocio-culturalcontextisthatofatelevisioninterview,whichis controlledbysharedassumptionsaboutbehaviour,rulesandnorms,seen tobeappropriatebytheinterlocutors.Inthetelevisioninterviewthese ruleswillberelatedtohowtheparticipantstaketurnsatspeaking,what canbetalkedaboutandsoon.Bothoftheinteractantsinthiscaseshared knowledgeaboutGurpal'sstory,althoughonlyGurpalhadallthefacts.. 3.2Lexico-grammaticalAnalysis AppendixAsummarisesthemoodanalysisofthetextandallows someclaimsaboutthestatusoftheparticipantstobemade,asinturn77 fromGurpal. 77GV:(vii)Butthenyouthink(viii)`hangon,(ix)something'snot righthere.'(x)Andthenwhenconstablesstartedsaying (xi)`wellhangon,(xii)we'refearingwhat'sgoingto happen.' TheonlyminorclauseproducedbyTimwasagreeting.Inmarked contrasttothisGurpalproduced24minorclauses.Thisshowsamajor differenceintheparticipants'behaviour.Manyoftheminorclauses producedbyGurpalwereinresponsetostatementsandquestionsbyTim.. (14). [87].

(16) Tim'sabsenceofminorclauseswasindicativeofhisrole.Hewaslegally unabletogivehisownopinions,andinsomecasesminorclausesof acknowledgementcouldhavebeenmisinterpretedasagreement,and thereforehemayconsciouslyhaveavoidedusingthem. Gurpal'smostfrequentchoiceofsubjectwas"1",referringtohimself Thisisnotunexpectedinaninterviewabouthisexperiences。Another interestingsubjectchoicewasthegenericorinclusive`you'.Thiswasused almostexclusivelywhentalkingabouthisownfeelingsandemotions.This avoideddistancinghimselffromTimandtheaudience,creatingasense thattheytoowouldhavefeltthesamewayifithappenedtothem,in efFectmakinghimjustanordinarypersonandpartofsocietyasawhole, forrningsornesenseofsolidarity. Althoughdepersonalisationisoftenachievedinscientificwritingby usingthepronoun"one",inspokenEnglishitwouldsoundstilted.GarcesConejosandSanchez-Macarro(1998)commentingonwhy"one"isoften usedinscientificdiscourseoffer:"Thewriterdepersonalizeshim/herself becomingonewiththewholeesotericcommunity,thusgivinghis/her claimsmoreuniversalitybymakingthemapartnotonlyofhis/her experience-andthereforeresponsibility-butthatofthecommunityasa whole"(p。185).Thisappearsconsonantwiththeeffectofusing`you' insteadof`rwhentalkingaboutoη6'∫selfinspokendiscourse. GurpalproducedahigherproportionofnegativeclausesthanTim, usuallytodenyorchallengeTim'sclaims.Themajorityofthenegative clausesproducedbyTimwereusedtotalkaboutGurpal'sfeelingsor actlons. AsGurpalproducedconsiderablymoreclausesthanTim,thefact thatheproducedlessthanhalfasmanymodalitiessignifiesagreatdeal abouthisposition.Thecombinationoflowmodalitiesandhighnegation emphasisesthatGurpalwasdefiniteabouthispropositions.Hewasnot. [86]. (15).

(17) concernedwithnuances,butinsteadsawhispositionascertainandright. Timofferedmuchmoreinthewayofuncertainties,andtheseweremostly todowithdetailsaboutGurpal'scase.. 3.3SemanticAnalysis AsemanticanalysisofthetextwascarriedoutusingtheAppraisal AnalysisframeworkdescribedinEgginsandSlade(2004,pp.116-140).It wasnecessarytoconsultothertextsinordertofullyappreciatethe framework'sapplications.AsummaryoftheAppraisalitemsinthetextis showninAppendixB.. 3.3.11nterpretationofappraisalitems ForeverytenclausesTimproduced,heproduced4.8ATTITUDE items.ForeverytenclausesGurpalproduced,heproduced2.8 ATTITUDEitems.Thisdifferenceisquiteimportant,andsuggeststhat TimisrelativelymoreevaluativeinhisattitudethanGurpa1. LessthantwentypercentofTim'sATTITUDEitemsarepositive, whereasthirty-sixpercentofGurpal'sarepositive.Thisisperhapsanother traitofthetelevisioninterview,andappearscongruentwiththemood analysis.Itmayofcoursebeapersonaldifferencebetweenthetwo parties,howeveritseemsreasonabletospeculatethatanaward-winning journalistandnovelistwouldusemoreATTITUDEitemsineveryday conversationthanapoliceman. Appraisingitemsrelatedto/4茄6'arefairlyevenlydistributed betweenthetwoparties.Inmostofthecasesthough,the6規o'67(see White,2002)ofthe4旋6'isGurpal,thatisthefeelingsoremotionsbeing assessedemanatefromhim.Gurpalinmanycasesusedthegeneric`you', whenhewastalkingabouthisownfeelings.WecanalsoseethatTimwas remainingonthecorrectsideofthelaw,bynotshowinganyofhisown. (16). [85].

(18) feelings,ashewasonnooccasiontheθ. 規oホ召70fthe4が. 乙c'.. ノ勿496窺6πitemsaccountedforahighproportionofAppraisalitems forbothparties.Themajorityofthesewereinthesocialsα. ρ7ρ ρ擁. η6'ゴoπ. 一. ζソgroup.Thisshouldnotreallybesurprisinginaninterviewabout. racismandcorruption.Bothpartiesalsousedノ 6s`66〃z一. 勿496規6η'itemsof∫ocガ. ホ6ηα6助yandthesealsorelatetoGurpal's'6η. αZ. αcゴζy。. BothpartiesusednumerousAMPLIFICATION/GRADUATION items.PerhapsthemostnoticeabledifferenceisthatGurpalproduced sixteeninstancesof加'ガgα'ガoπandTimonlythree.Thisshowsthat althoughTimwasquiterestrictedinwhathesaidheusedthislackof 加'ガgα'ゴoηtoincreasehispower.Morethanhalfofthe癬. オガgα'勧items. producedbyGurpalwereusedtocorrecterroneousstatementsortemper theforceofTim'sstatements.. 3.4Exchangestructureanalysis Onitsown,theexchangestructureanalysisprovidesaonedimensionalviewofthetext.Timasksallthequestionsandsupplies statementsforGurpaltoanswerandconfirmorrefute.Thisseemslikea largelyone-sidedaffair.AppendixCprovidesasummaryofthediscourse speechfunctionscontainedinthetext. Thenumberofturnsperspeakerwasdeterminedbythefactthat therewereonlytwoparticipantsandthereforeprovideslittleinsightabout thediscourse.Timhadanaverageof1.68movesperturn,whileGurpal realises3.15,considerablymorevalueperturn,signifying,onemaythink, dominance.AlthoughTimproducedsixty-ninemovesinhisforty-oneturns itshouldbenotedthatheonlyproducedahundredandfourclauses,with l.5clausespermove.IfwecomparethiswithGurpal,wefindavery similarfigureofL46.Thisimpliesasimilarcomplexityandrichnessto theirspeechintermsofclauses.Thisis,accordingtoEgginsandSlade. [84]. (17).

(19) (2004,p.217),isalsotobeexpectedfromcasualconversation. Timproducedalloftheの6痂. πgmoves,atotalofsixteen,thisisone. areainwhichhewasobligedtodominateandGurpalwasdependanton himtodoso.Astatementoffactwashispreferredopeningmove,often followedbya"question"inthesamemove。 TimproducedlessthanonethirdoftheCo励. 鰍. 吻gspeechfunctions. thatGurpaldid.Thisdifferencealoneaccountsformostofthedifferencein thenumberofclausesproduced。Gurpalwastheinteractanttellinghis story,andinordertonarratetheeventsofthestoryheusedalotof Co窺. 吻%勿g!ヵ. ノoZoπg加gmoves.OnlyTimused4か. ρ朋4吻gmovesandthese. wereusuallyafterGurpalhadregisteredwhathewassaying.AsTimon nooccasionproducedanyformofaR6α6ム situationinwhichaCoη. ・76幼o忽伽%6.・. 砂加雇. ガπgmove,therewasno. 初gmovewasnecessaryforGurpal.. GurpalusedallthreeformsoftheP70Zoπg碗gspeechfunction,with nearlyhalfofthem6κ'6雇. 加g.Thispointstohimseeinghisroleas. providerofinformation.SlightlylessthanhalfofTim'sCo厩. 肱. 伽gmoves. were.P70Zoπg∵6κ'6雇,althoughfourfromninewereinhisopening monologue. TheR6αc伽g.・76ε areaofRε. ρ加. ρo忽. 吻8'moveswereallproducedbyGurpal.The. η8∵60ψoη'加gandR￠. ρ加. η8∵sπ ρρ07伽galsoprovideuswith. hardfactsaboutthelevelofconfrontation.Is`HARDtalk'HARD?Wel1,it appearsthatinnearly75%ofRゆ 60砂oπ. 卿. πgmovessupportwasachieved,and. 磁oκinonly25%percentofcases.Thetextprovidesamuch. richersourceof7の)乙yガ. ηgmovesthantheoneinEgginsandSlade(2004,p.. 216),inwhichapproximately6%are7の moveswere吻 R6α6伽g.・. 加. 卿. πg.Inthistextover18%ofall. η9.. 勿o初. ゴ67movesprovideanareaofcontrast.Allbuttwo. ofTim'stwenty-ninemovesinthisareawere磁cん thefourpossible'7αcん. (18). 加g.Heusedthreeof. 加g'movetypes:60瞬7規,cZα7のandヵ70∂. [83]. θ.The.

(20) 〃 αoん加g.・ ρ70∂6move,whichoftenoffersdetailsforconfirmationbythe. previousspeakerwasthemostcommonlyused.Thistypeofmove accountedformorethanaquarterofallTim'smovesandwashismost usedspeechfunction.Thistypeofmoveisusedtosomeextent,tosupport theconversationandtokeepitflowing,whichwouldprobablybeseenas. partoftheinterviewer'srole.AccordingtoEgginsandSlade(2004,p.218) thisisindicativeoftherolesofprovocateuranddependent-respondent. Initiatingmoveswereasonewouldexpect,allproducedbyTim. Fromthemoodanalysisitcanbeseenthattherewereanumberof differentmoodtypesusedtorealisethisfunction.Theconstantuseofthe interrogativemoodwouldleadtosomethingthatsoundedmorelikean interrogationthananinterview.Interrogativesareusedmoreoftenas trackingmoves.WecanseethatGurpalavoids`questions'intermsof interrogativemoodand翻. 磁. 加gor〃. αc々加gspeechfunctions.. 4.OInterpretationofFindings Itisobviousthatbothpartiesinatwopartyinterviewareintegral tothecourseoftheinterview,howevertherolesoftheinterlocutors,as constrainedbygenre,andhowtheyperformintheinterviewareaffected byaplethoraofvariables.Thereareanalmostinfinitenumberofchoices availableintermsofthelanguagethateachinteractantproduces,and thesearechoicesthatmayormaynotbeconscious.. 4.1TheDistributionofPower EgginsandSlade(2004)suggestthat"casualconversationinvolves aconstantmovementbetweenestablishingsolidarityandexploring difference"(p.22)andthisisalsobetrueforthe"HARDtalk"interview althoughthemovementmaybemuchmoresubtleandlessapparent.The differencesareconstrainedbygenreandtheroleofeachinterlocutor. [82]. (19).

(21) withintheinterview.Establishingsolidarityisnotatallstraightforwardas theinteractantsmustattempttonotonlymakeaconnectionwiththe personinfrontofthem,butalsowiththeunseenaudienceandthisisan importantfeatureofthegenre. TimSebastian,asajournalist,islegallyunabletogivehisown opinionswheninterviewingandunabletocondoneorcondemntheactsof others.Inadditionhemusttakeintoaccounttheaudiencewatchingat homeandtrytoprovideinterestingviewing,takingcarenottoalienate himselfTimproducedonlyoneminorclauseandprobablythisscarcity wasasaresultofhimnotbeingabletoovertlygivehisownopinions.He wascarefulwiththeuseofclauseswithnegativepolarityandproduced fewinconjunctionwithagreatdealofnegativeATTITUDEitemsand few厩'ガgα'ガoπ. ∫.ThispositionedGurpalsothathehadtoproducemore. negativeclauses,whichmayhavecolouredtheaudience'sfeelingstowards Gurpal. TherewaslittlevisibleaggressionfromTim,incomparisonto interviewswithpeopleofhigherstanding,andthiswasperhapsbecause hedidnotseeGurpalasan"ordinary"person,asathreattohisstatus.As an"ordinary"persontheaudienceislikelytobemoresympathetic towardshim,andforcefulattackwouldhaveappearedtobeunfair. Timaskedallthequestionsandinitiatedalloftheexchanges,which. gavehimallofthecontroloverthedirectionoftheinterview.Healsohad lessabandonedclauses,whichpointstohimhavingbeenmoreprepared fortheencounter,althoughagainthismayjustbehisfamiliaritywiththe. genre.Hedidnothavetofightfortheturnatspeechandwasseldom interrupted.Tim'spossessionofagreatdealofknowledgeaboutthe eventsofGurpa1'scase,probablyprovidedbyhisresearchers,potentially gavehimameanstousurpGurpal'sstatusasexpert.However,Tim's informationwasonanumberofoccasionsapparentlyincorrect,andthis. (20). [81].

(22) servedtounderminehisauthority,whenclaimswererefutedbyGurpal. Thereisevidenceofanumberofkindsofpower,thetwomost obviousbeingpowerderivedfromco窺70Zandpowerderivedfrom 肋o躍164960r6ψ6漉s6.Timpossessesalmostallofthepowerof60π701, andduetohisresearchteamagreatdealofinformationresultingin. powerof肋o副6496。Gurpalhaslittlepowerofcontrol,althoughthe answersandtheinformationheprovidesmaytosomeextentcontrolthe directionoftheinterview。Hedoeshoweverpossessthemostcomplete accountofthefacts,astheinterviewisabouthisownexperienceof racism,thisgiveshimthegreatestpowerof肋o卿Z6496,particularlyas Tim'sinformationappearserroneousonanumberofoccasions.Theremay beanotherformofpower,powerofs6が. ￠ゆ76∬. ガoη,whichbylawTimis. unabletoshow,althoughtherearewaystocircumventtherestrictions,by usingquotedsourcesforinstance.Tim'sinterviewingskillsweredeveloped asajournalistinthefield,andIfeelifthisinterviewhadtakenplace outsidethestudio,withoutthecameras,hewouldhavebeenmuchless restrictedinhiscomments,assertingsomeofhisownopinions.. 5.OConclusions Intheprefatorysectionsofthischapterithasbeensuggestedthat thepowerinatelevisioninterviewwasdichotomous,althoughunequally distributed,inthiscase.Aco-dependencyexistsbetweentheparticipants andthatultimatelytheymaysharemanyofthesamegoals. Theinterviewercontrolledthedirectionoftheinterviewby initiatingexchangesandprobingforinformation.Theinterviewerwas morecarefulwithhisspeech,andthismayhavebeendueinpartto planningbutalsotoexperienceofthegenre.Theinterviewee,dependant ontheinterviewerfordirection,wasthedominantparticipantintermsof clausesandmovesandsuppliedthemajorityofthe`facts'.Theinterviewer. [80]. (21).

(23) wasalsodependentontheintervieweetoprovideinformationandanswer hisquestions. Theinterviewerattemptedtocontrolthedirectionofthe. proceedings,andpossessedagooddegreeofknowledgeaboutthe situation.Theintervieweehadmoreoftheknowledge,butlittlecontrol overthedirectionoftheinterview.Theknowledgeheimpartedthough, hadaneffectonthedirection。Itisnotbeingsuggestedinthecaseofthis interviewthatGurpalwasmorepowerfulthanTim,buthispossessionof the`facts'didgivehimmuchmorepower,inthesensethatknowledgeis power,thanthetypeofintervieweesstudiedinradiointerviewsbyKress (1985,1989).Inthecaseofthe`HARDtalk'interviewanalysed,powerwas muchmorethanjustknowledge.Itwasmadeupofavarietyoffactors, andthepowerofcontrolwasmoreinfluentialonthediscoursethan knowledge. Themodelusedinthisanalysishasprovidedvaluableknowledge aboutthegenreandthisinterview,andcanbeusedasacomparisonwith otherinterviewsinfutureresearch.Itwouldbeusefulforacorpustobe madeforthegenrethatwouldprovidemuchmoreconclusiveinformation aboutwhathasbeenlittlemorethanapreliminaryinvestigationinthe caseofthisstudy.. References Bacon,F.(1597).読. ゴあα〃o麗 ∫sα67α6016ぬ. 確解 ∫め π∫.London.. Carpentier,N.,&Hannot,W.(2009).Tobeacommonhero:Theuneasybalancebetween theordinaryandordinarinessinthesubjectpositionofmediatedordinarypeopleinthe talkshowjanpubliek.〃z孟67π. 磁o襯Zノ. ∂%〃zαZ(ゾCπ. 伽7α ♂S'%漉6∫,ヱ2(6),597.. Derewianka,B.(2001).Pedagogicalgrammars:TheirroleinEnglishlanguageteaching. InA.Burns&C.Cofan(Eds)..4η. α砂s加gEηg♂. ガ訪. 鋭 αglo∂ αZco泌. θ鉱・.47召 αゴθ7.London:. Routledge. Eggins,S.andSlade,D.(2004).、. 肋 α砂5加g6αs観. ♂coア7肥プ5磁oπ.London:Continuum.. Ekstr6m,M.(2001).Politiciansinterviewedontelevisionnews.1)ゴ3co%7∫6(豊Socガ 563.. (22). [79]. ⑳,12(5),.

(24) Firth,J.R.(1957a).P砂675ガ. η 五蜘g厩s〃03ヱ934-1951.London:OxfordUniversityPress.. Firth,J.R(1957b).Asynopsisoflinguistictheory.lnS'%ゴ (助召cガ α1"oJπ 〃z6げ. 伽. ガ6s加. 五ガ π9協 ∫'ガの4π αかsガ∫. ∫)加10Zogガcα150c碗y)(pp1-31).London:Blackwell.Reprintedin. RR.Palmer(Ed)(1968).SelectedPapersofJR.Firth,1952-1959.(pp.168-205).London: Longman. Garces-Conejos,P.andSanchez-Macarro,A.(1998).Scienti且cdiscourseasinteraction.In A.Sanchez-MacarroandR.Carter(Eds).五. 吻g諮'ゴcc乃oガ66∫. αc70∬g朋76s.Amsterdam:. JohnBenjaminsPublishing Halliday,MAK.(1985)..肋. 磁70伽. Halliday,MAK.(1994).、. 肋. ε'ゴo耐oノ励 ε'加 αZg7α 〃z〃zα7.London:EdwardArnold.. 纏70伽6〃o尻o伽. η6'ガo襯Zg7α. 規規 α7,2忽6ゴ.London:Edward. Arnold. Halliday,MAK.andHasan.R.(1989).五. απg%㎎6,00漉. κち α忽. 齢ぬ4ψ6c孟sげ. ♂ αηg%㎎8初. α ∫ocガ α」一 ∫ε鰐ガo'詫勿7確)6c'勿6.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress. Holborow,M.(1991).Linkinglanguageandsituation:Acourseforadvancedlearners. E五71ノ. ∂z4〃zα♂,レ01%〃2ε45(1),24-32.. Iedema,R.,Feez,S.&White,PRR.(1994).漉6ガ. α1飽zα(フ.Sydney:DisadvantagedSchools. Program,NSWDepartmentofSchoolEducation. Kress,G.(1985).五. 励g協s'ガc/)γ06θ ∬ θ∫ ガ%∫ocガ06〃'κ γα♂ρ名α6オガc6.Oxford:OxfordUniversity. Press. Malinowski,B.(1923).Theproblemofmeaninginprimitivelanguages.SupplementIin CK.OgdenandI.A.Richards.71加. 窺6α π加g(ゾ. 勉6α η初g.(296-336).NewYork:Harcourt. Brace&World. Malinowski,B.(1935).CozoZgα74観. ∫αη〃加〃〃z㎎ガ6.1ノ∂♂.2.London:AllenandUnwin.. Martin,J.R.(1995a).Interpersonalmeaning,persuasion,andpublicdiscourse:Packing semioticpunch.、. 肋s'zαZガ αηノ∂〃7παZ(ゾ五加g%ゴ ∫'ガcs,15,3-67.. Martin,J.R.(1995b).ReadingPositions/positioningreaders:JUDGEMENTinEnglish, 1)70母)66た6τ ノ∂z4ア ηα1αプ/1κε'7α〃αηTESOL,10(2),27-37. Martin,JR.(2000).BeyondExchange:APPRAISALSystemsinEnglish.inS.Hunston andG.Thompson,(Eds).E刀. α伽 α'ゴoπ腕'6鉱. ・.4%'乃07ガα1∫孟 α72c6α 忽. 魏660η. ∫伽o'ガo%げ. 4∫s60κ7s6.Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress. Martin,J.R.(2001).Language,registerandgenre.InA.Burns,&C.Coffin,(Eds). ∠しzαかs加gEηgZガ. ∫乃ガ η αgZoろ αZco泓6κ. 乙ソ176αolθ 先London:Routledge.. Martin,JR.(2002).Meaningbeyondtheclause:SFLperspectives.∠4朋. 照ZR伽. 伽qズ. 君.醒)1ガ64五ガ η9%ガ5がo∫,22. Martin,JR.&White,PR.R,(2005).7'加. 伽g%㎎. θ げ ω α1嬬. ゴoアz,α 勿7α 磁Z掬Eアzg〃. ∫乃.. London:PalgraveMacmillan. Montgomery,M.(2001).Theusesofauthenticity:"Speakingfromexperience"inaUK electionbroadcast.71加Co〃z〃z%卿cα. 〃oη1ぞ θ加6zo,4(4),447-462.. VanLeeuwen,TJ.&Thornborrow,J,(2001).Authenticityinmediadiscourse.Special. [78]. (23).

(25) issueof1)ガ500z〃sθS'%4ゴ6s,3(4). White,P.PR.(2000).Dialogueandinter-subjectivity:Reinterpretingthesenlanticsof modalityandhedging,InM.Coulthard,J.Cotterill&F.Rock(Eds.).Dガ刀 ∫.'碓oプん伽9卿. 麟. ゴ忽09%θ'S616磁. ゴ加勿73〃o〃. α10g粥 π 加7地. 孟 ηα加ガ∫. 五4Z)湾Co碗. B〃〃伽 ψ 伽1999(pp.67-80).TUbingen:MaxNeiemeyerVerlag. White,PRR.(2001).∠. 肋. 腕〃o磁o'o刎'oπ7'乃70%帥. 砂ヵ7αゴ3αZ伽oη.Retrievedfrom. http://www.grammatics.com/appraisal/AppraisalGuide/Framed/Frame.htm White,PRR.(2002).舶. 磁704媚oηco跳. θガ η 妙 ργαガsα1αηめ. www.grammatics.coln/apPraisal/index.html. (24). [77]. ∫ガs.Retrievedfromhttp://. プ6%66,.

(26) AppendixA-SummaryoftheLexica1-grammaticalMoodAnalysis. Mood(clausetype) nurnberofclauses. TimSebastian. 104. GurpalVirdi 180. (incornpleteclauses) 7(6.7%). 17(9。4%). declarative full/elliptical. 62(59.6%)/11(10.6%). 119(66.7%)/15(7.8%). polarinterrogative full/elliptical. 4(3.8%)/2(1.9%). taggeddeclarative full/elliptical. 6(5.8%)/1(1%). wh-interrogative full/elliptical. 7(6.7%)/1(1%). lmperatlve. 2(1.9%). 4(2.2%). minor. 1(1%). 24(13。3%). moodless. 2(1.9%). mostfrequentsubject choice. you(=Gurpal)40. 147. you(=Gurpalandothers)1. you(=Tim)1. we3. you(=Gurpal)1. various3「dpersonsingular. you(generic)14. 33. we8. various3「dpersonpluralg. various3「dpersonsingular. there5. 37 various3「dpersonplural22. negatlon. 7. 25. CirCUmStantial. 33. 39. interpersonal. 15. 28. textual. 23. 82. Adjuncts. totalno.ofmodalities 9. 4. [76]. (25).

(27) AppendixB-SummaryoftheSemanticAppraisalAnalysis TimSebastian. GurpalVirdi. totalApPraisalitems. 79. 88. tOtalClaUSeS. 104. 180. ApPreciation. 1(1pos.). reactlon composltlon valuation. 1(1pos.). total. 2. Affect irrealis-dis/inclination. 5(4pos.1neg.). 3(2pos。1neg.). realis-un/hapPiness. 6(6neg.). 7(2pos。5neg.). 4(1pos.3neg.). 4(4pos.). 15. 14. 29(1pos.28neg.). 29(4pos.25neg). 4(1pos,3neg.). 9(6pos.3neg.). total. 33. 36. Attitudetotal. 50(9pos.41neg.). 50(18pos.32neg.). enrichment. 7. 6. augmentlng. 19. 16. mltlgatlon. 3. 16. total. 29. 36. in/security dis/satisfaction total. Judgernent socialsanction-propriety veraclty SOCialeSteem-tenaCity normality capaClty. Amplification. (26). [75].

(28) tracking:confirrn. 4. tracking:probe. 18 3. reaCting:reSOIVe. 一. challenging:rebound. 2. 1. challenging:counter. (28). 4. total. 29. [73].

(29)