Abstract
Research on spoken interactions has long shown interest in the communication of evaluations or assessments, but it remains limited in revealing the functions of evaluations charged with attitudinal values. Based on the appraisal framework developed in systemic functional linguistics, this article examines the attitudinal evaluations in eighteen job interviews from a live Chinese television program entitled ‘Only You’, exploring how they are communicated as attitude-ideation couplings to negotiate and construct axiological affiliation between interlocutors. The findings reveal that axiological affiliation in spoken interactions can be built via four strategies, including attitudinal enhancement that involves two layers of attitude-ideation coupling; attitudinal elaboration that may appear as specification of a target of evaluation or elaboration of an attitude; attitudinal extension that works with consistent attitudinal polarity and similar evaluative function; and attitudinal projection that is realized through the expression of attitudinal affinity or attitudinal agreement. This article seeks to extend the existing linguistic account of dialogic affiliation and spoken evaluations and shed light on the systemic functional notion of individuation by construing it as a social process in which social persons’ negotiation of communal identities is coupled with their enactment of different personae.
About the author
Wenchao Zhao received his PhD in Systemic Functional Linguistics from Xiamen University and completed his postdoctoral research at Shanghai Jiao Tong University under the supervision of Professor James R. Martin. He is currently Associate Professor of English and Linguistics at Henan University of Science and Technology. His research interests cover social interactions and academic discourse. His most recent publications appear in Discourse Studies and Journal of Linguistics.
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my gratitude to the editor-in-chief Professor Srikant Sarangi and the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and constructive suggestions. The research has benefited from the financial support of a project of the Humanities and Social Science Foundation of China’s Ministry of Education (Grant No. 19YJA740084).
Appendix transcription conventions (adapted from Jefferson 2004)
= latched utterances by the same speaker or by different speakers
(.) noticeable pause
[] overlap between utterances
word, continuing intonation
word. falling intonation
word? rising intonation
word! animated speech tone
word emphatic stress
References
Adelswärd, Viveka. 1988. Styles of success: On impression management as collaborative action in job interviews. Linköping: Linköping University.Search in Google Scholar
Akinnaso, F. Niyi & Cheryl S. Ajirotutu. 1982. Performance and ethnic style in job interviews. In John Gumperz (ed.), Language and Social Identity, 119–144. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511620836.010Search in Google Scholar
Antaki, Charles. 2002. “Lovely”: Turn-initial high-grade assessments in telephone closings. Discourse Studies 4(1). 5–23.10.1177/14614456020040010101Search in Google Scholar
Benwell, Bethan & Elizabeth Stokoe. 2007. Discourse and identity. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Campbell, Sarah & Celia Roberts. 2007. Migration, ethnicity and completing discourses in the job interview: Synthesizing the institutional and personal. Discourse and Society 18(3). 243–271.10.1177/0957926507075474Search in Google Scholar
Don, Alexanne. 2016. It is hard to mesh all this: Invoking attitude, persona and argument organization. Functional Linguistics 3(9). 1–26.10.1186/s40554-016-0033-1Search in Google Scholar
Du Bois, John W. 2007. The stance triangle. In Robert Englebretson (ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction, 139–182. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.10.1075/pbns.164.07duSearch in Google Scholar
Fasulo, Alessandra & Chiara Monzoni. 2009. Assessing mutable objects: A multimodal analysis. Research on Language and Social Interaction 42(4). 362–376.10.1080/08351810903296481Search in Google Scholar
Gumperz, John. 1992. Interviewing in intercultural situations. In Paul Drew & John Heritage (eds.), Talk at work, 302‒327. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. & Ruqaiya Hasan. 2013. Cohesion in English. London: Routledge.10.4324/9781315836010Search in Google Scholar
Halliday, Michael A. K. & Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen. 2014. Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar. Oxon: Routledge.10.4324/9780203783771Search in Google Scholar
Heritage, John. 2002. Oh-prefaced responses to assessments: A method of modifying agreement/disagreement. In Cecilia Ford, Barbara Fox & Sandra Thompson (eds.), The language of turn and sequence, 196–224. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Heritage, John & Geoffrey Raymond. 2005. The terms of agreement: Indexing epistemic authority and subordination in assessment sequences. Social Psychology Quarterly 68. 15–38.10.1177/019027250506800103Search in Google Scholar
Jefferson, Gail. 2004. Glossary of transcript symbols with an introduction. In Gene H. Lerner (ed.), Conversation analysis: Studies from the first generation, 13–31. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.125.02jefSearch in Google Scholar
Knight, Naomi. 2008. “Still cool … and American too!”: An SFL analysis of deferred bonds in internet messaging humor. In Nina Norgaard (ed.), Systemic functional linguistics in use: Odense working papers in language and communication, 481–502. Odense: University of Southern Denmark.Search in Google Scholar
Knight, Naomi. 2010a. Laughing our bonds off: Conversational humor in relation to affiliation. Sydney: University of Sydney PhD thesis.Search in Google Scholar
Knight, Naomi. 2010b. Wrinkling complexity: Concepts of identity and affiliation in humor. In Monika Bednarek & James R. Martin (eds.), New discourse on language: Functional perspectives on multimodality, identity, and affiliation, 59–98. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar
Knight, Naomi. 2013. Evaluating experience in funny ways: How friends bond through conversational humor. Text & Talk 33(4). 553–574.10.1515/text-2013-0025Search in Google Scholar
Komter, Martha L. 1991. Conflict and cooperation in job interviews: A study of talk, tasks and ideas. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/pbns.15Search in Google Scholar
Lindström, Anna & Trine Heinemann. 2009. Good enough: Low-grade assessments in caregiving situations. Research on Language and Social Interaction 42(4). 309–328.10.1080/08351810903296465Search in Google Scholar
Lipovsky, Caroline. 2008. Constructing affiliation and solidarity in job interviews. Discourse and Communication 2(4). 411–432.10.1177/1750481308095938Search in Google Scholar
Lipovsky, Caroline. 2011. ‘It’s really a great presentation!’: Appraising candidates in job interviews. Linguistics and the Human Sciences 4(2). 161–185.10.1558/lhs.v4i2.161Search in Google Scholar
Lipovsky, Caroline. 2012. Fostering affiliation through humor in a job interview. Sociolinguistic Studies 6(1). 149–172.10.1558/sols.v6i1.149Search in Google Scholar
Martin, James R. 2000. Beyond exchange: Appraisal systems in English. In Susan Hunston & Geoff Thompson (eds.), Evaluation in text: Authorial stance and the construction of discourse, 142–175. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Martin, James R. 2004. Mourning: How we get aligned. Discourse and Society 15(2/3). 321–344.10.1177/0957926504041022Search in Google Scholar
Martin, James R. 2010. Semantic variation: Modeling realization, instantiation and individuation in social semiotics. In Monika Bednarek & James R. Martin (eds.), New discourse on language: Functional perspectives on multimodality, identity, and affiliation, 1–34. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar
Martin, James R. & David Rose. 2007. Working with discourse: Meaning beyond the clause. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar
Martin, James R. & Maree K. Stenglin. 2006. Materializing reconciliation: Negotiating difference in a post-colonial exhibition. In Terry D. Royce & Wendy L. Bowcher (eds.), New directions in the analysis of multimodal discourse, 215–338. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Search in Google Scholar
Martin, James R. & Peter R. R. White. 2005. The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1057/9780230511910Search in Google Scholar
Martin, James R., Michele Zappavigna & Paul Dwyer. 2012. Beyond redemption: Choice and consequence in Youth Justice Conferencing. In Zhenhua Wang (ed.), Forensic linguistics, 227–257. Shanghai: Shanghai Jiao Tong University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Martin, James R., Michele Zappavigna, Paul Dwyer & Chris Cléirigh. 2013. Users in uses of language: Embodied identity in Youth Justice Conferencing. Text & Talk 33(4). 467–496.10.1515/text-2013-0022Search in Google Scholar
Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M, Kazuhilo Teruya & Marvin Lam. 2010. Key terms in systemic functional linguistics. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar
Mchoul, Alexander. 1978. The organization of turns at formal talk in the classroom. Language in Society 7. 183–213.10.1017/S0047404500005522Search in Google Scholar
Mondada, Lorenza. 2009. The embodied and negotiated production of assessments in instructed actions. Research on Language and Social Interaction 42(4). 329–361.10.1080/08351810903296473Search in Google Scholar
Ngo, Thu & Len Unsworth. 2015. Reworking the appraisal framework in ESL research: Refining attitude resources. Functional Linguistics 2. 1–24.10.1186/s40554-015-0013-xSearch in Google Scholar
Piirainen-Marsh, Arja & Heidi Jauni. 2012. Assessments and the social construction of expertise in political TV interviews. Text & Talk 32(5). 637–660.10.1515/text-2012-0030Search in Google Scholar
Pomerantz, Anita. 1984. Agreeing and disagreeing with assessments: Some features of preferred/dispreferred turn shapes. In John M. Atkinson & John Heritage (eds.), Structures of social action: Studies in conversation analysis, 57–101. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511665868.008Search in Google Scholar
Raymond, Geoffrey & John Heritage. 2006. The epistemics of social relations: Owning grandchildren. Language in Society 35. 677–705.10.1017/S0047404506060325Search in Google Scholar
Roberts, Celia & Srikant Sarangi. 1999. Hybridity in gatekeeping discourse: Issues of practical relevance for the researcher. In Srikant Sarangi & Celia Roberts (eds.), Talk, work and institutional order: Discourse in medical, mediation and management settings, 473–503. New York: Mouton de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110208375.4.473Search in Google Scholar
Sarangi, Srikant. 2000. Activity types, discourse types and interactional hybridity: The case of genetic counselling. In Srikant Sarangi & Malcolm Coulthard (eds.), Discourse and social life, 1–27. London: Pearson.10.4324/9781315838502-1Search in Google Scholar
Scheuer, Jann. 2001. Recontextualization and communicative styles in job interviews. Discourse Studies 3(2). 223–248.10.1177/1461445601003002004Search in Google Scholar
Sinclair, John M. & Malcolm Coulthard. 1975. Towards an analysis of discourse: The English used by teachers and pupils. London: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Stenglin, Maree K. 2004. Packaging curiosities: Towards a grammar of three-dimensional space. Sydney: University of Sydney PhD thesis.Search in Google Scholar
Stivers, Tanya. 2008. Stance, alignment and affiliation during story telling: When nodding is a token of preliminary affiliation. Research on Language and Social Interaction 41(1). 31–57.10.1080/08351810701691123Search in Google Scholar
Szenes, Eszter. 2016. The linguistic construction of business reasoning: Towards a language-based model of decision-making in undergraduate business. Sydney: University of Sydney PhD thesis.Search in Google Scholar
Weatherall, Ann & Leelo Keevallik. 2016. When claims of understanding are less than affiliative. Research on Language and Social Interaction 49(3). 167–182.10.1080/08351813.2016.1196544Search in Google Scholar
Webster, Jonathan. 2009. Introduction. In Michael A. K. Halliday (ed.), Continuum companion to systemic functional linguistics, 1–11. London: Continuum.Search in Google Scholar
Zappavigna, Michele. 2011. Ambient affiliation: A linguistic perspective on Twitter. New Media and Society 13(5). 788–806.10.1177/1461444810385097Search in Google Scholar
Zappavigna, Michele. 2014. Enacting identity in microblogging through ambient affiliation. Discourse and Communication 8(2). 209–228.10.1177/1750481313510816Search in Google Scholar
Zappavigna, Michele. 2018. Searchable talk: Hashtags and social media metadiscourse. London: Bloomsbury Academic.Search in Google Scholar
Zappavigna, Michele & James R. Martin. 2018a. #Communing affiliation: Social tagging as a resource for aligning around values in social media. Discourse Context and Media 22. 4–12.10.1016/j.dcm.2017.08.001Search in Google Scholar
Zappavigna, Michele & James R. Martin. 2018b. Discourse and diversionary justice: An analysis of Youth Justice Conferencing. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.10.1007/978-3-319-63763-1Search in Google Scholar
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
