EVALUATIVE RESPONSES IN MODERN ENGLISH FICTION

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.108021

Keywords:

addressee, evaluation, evaluative response, fiction, manipulation, pragmalinguistics, speech act theory

Abstract

The process of communication implies information exchange, mutual influence, and evaluation of speakers. An addressee is an important participant of this process, yet little is known about him as a person who receives and evaluates an addresser’s utterance. This is particularly significant because the addressee influences the further course of communication by his/her own responses due to the rules of turn taking. An evaluative response is thus an evaluative speech act that serves as the perlocutionary effect of an addresser’s utterance and simultaneously expresses some intention concerning an interlocutor. The present paper aims to identify, classify and analyse the types of evaluative responses from a pragmatic perspective. The empirical material consists of 30 modern American and British novels, or 3400 dialogues containing evaluative responses. The theoretical basis of the investigation integrates the main principles of pragmalinguistics and speech act theory. In view of this, we suggested a pragmatic typology of evaluative responses based on an addressee’s speech reaction to the received stimulus. The study claims the universality of an evaluative response as a speech act. It may provide not only emotional perception of reality but also contribute to its adequate comprehension and even exert direct or hidden influence on verbal and nonverbal actions of an interlocutor. 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Tetiana Myroniuk, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Research and Educational Center for Foreign Languages

PhD, Senior Lecturer at Research and Educational Center for Foreign Languages, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine

 

References

  1. Arutyunova, N. (1999). Yazyk i mir cheloveka [Language and the World of a Man] (2nd ed.). Moscow, Russia: Yazyki russkoi kultury.
  2. Arutyunova, N. (2012). Logicheskij analiz yazyka. Adresatsiya diskursa [Logical analysis of the language. Discourse addressing]. Moscow, Russia: Indrik.
  3. Austin, J. (1975). How to do things with words (2nded.). Cambridge, USA: Harvard University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198245537.001.0001
  4. Baker, A. (2002). Goodbye Liverpool. North Yorkshire, England: Magna.
  5. Barr, E. (2006). Plan B. London, England: BCA.
  6. Bednarek, M. (2009). Dimensions of evaluation: Cognitive and linguistic perspectives. Pragmatics and Cognition, 17(1), 146-175. http://dx.doi.org/10.1075/pc.17.1.05bed
  7. Breeze, R., & Olza, I. (2017). Evaluation in media discourse. European perspectives. Berlin, Germany: Peter Lang. http://dx.doi.org/10.3726/b10531
  8. Childress, M. (2003). Crazy in Alabama. New York, USA: Ballantine Books.
  9. Dotsenko, E. (1997). Psikhologiya manipulyatsii [Psychology of Manipulation]. Moscow, Russia: CheRo.
  10. Fielding, H. (2000). Bridget Jones. The Edge of Reason. London, England: Picador.
  11. Grice, H. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Speech Acts (pp. 41-58). New York, USA: Academic Press.
  12. Grisham, J. (2002). The Summons. London, England: BCA.
  13. Halliday, M., & Matthiessen, C. (2014). Halliday's introduction to functional grammar (4th ed.). London, England and New York, USA: Routledge.
  14. Honcharova, N. (2002). Аksiolohichna struktura anhlomovnoho dialohichnoho dyskursu (na materiali hudozhnoi prozy) [Axiological structure of English dialogical discourse (based on the fiction)]. Unpublished PhD thesis, Kyiv National Linguistic University.
  15. Ishchenko, N. (2010). Otsinnyi komponent leksychnoho znachennia slova [Evaluative component of the lexical meaning of a word]. Filolohichni Traktaty, 2(3), 47-50.
  16. Kalita, А., & Taranenko, L. (2012). Rechevaya manipulyatsiya: opredelenie, funktsiya, mekhanizm realizatsii [Speech manipulation: definition, function, mechanism of realization]. Visnyk Kharkivskoho natsionalnoho universytetu imeni V.N. Karazina. Seriia “Romano-hermanska filolohiia. Metodyka vykladannia inozemnykh mov”, 1022, 10-19.
  17. King, C. (2007). Silk and Steel. London, England: Sphere.
  18. Kosmeda, T. (2000). Aksiolohichni aspekty prahmalinhvistyky: formuvannia i rozvytok katehorii otsinky [Axiological aspects of pragmalinguistics: forming and developing the category of evaluation]. Lviv, Ukraine: Ivan Franko Lviv National University.
  19. Krysanova, T. (1999). Vyslovliuvannia z nehatyvnoiu otsinkoiu adresata v suchasnii anhliiskii movi (komunikatyvno-prahmatychnyi aspekt) [Utterances with a negative evaluation of the addressee in modern English language (communicative-pragmatic aspect)]. Unpublished PhD thesis, Kyiv State Linguistic University.
  20. Kubryakova, E. (1995). Evolyutsia lingvisticheskikh idej vo vtoroj polovine XX veka [Evolution of linguistic ideas in the second half of XX century]. In Y. Stepanov (Ed.), Yazyk i nauka kontsa XX veka [Language and science at the end of XX century] (pp.144-238). Moscow, Russia: Institut yazykoznania RAN.
  21. Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London, England: Longman.
  22. Martin, J., & White, P. (2005). The language of evaluation. Appraisal in English. New York, USA: Palgrave Macmillan. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9780230511910
  23. Montefiore, S. (2005). Last voyage of the Valentina. London, England: BCA.
  24. Pocheptsov, G. (2009). Izbrannye trudy po lingvistike [Selected works in linguistics]. Kharkiv, Ukraine: V.N. Karazin Kharkiv national university.
  25. Prihodko, A. (2016). Cognitive-communicative organization of the evaluative frame. Lege Artis, 1(1), 275-308. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/lart-2016-0006
  26. Prykhodko, H. (2016). Katehoriia otsinky v konteksti zminy linhvistychnykh paradyhm [The category of evaluation in the context of the change of linguistic paradigms]. Zaporizhzhia, Ukraine: Kruhozir.
  27. Rhodes, E. (2005). Mixed blessings. London, England: BCA.
  28. Searle, J. (1976). A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in society, 5(1), 1-23. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0047404500006837
    |
  29. Shkitska, I. (2012). Manipuliatyvni taktyky pozytyvu: linhvistychnyi aspekt [Manipulative positive tactics: a linguistic aspect]. Kyiv, Ukraine: Publishing house of Dmytro Buraho.
  30. Thompson, G., & Alba-Juez, L. (Eds.) (2014). Evaluation in context. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/pbns.242
  31. Van Dijk, T. (2006). Discourse and manipulation. Discourse & Society, 7(3), 359-383. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0957926506060250
  32. Volʹf, E. (2006). Funktsionalʹnaya semantika otsenki [Functional semantics of evaluation] (2nd ed.). Moscow, Russia: Editorial URSS.
  33. Wang, Y., & Xu, J. (2013). The interrelation between evaluative categories and evaluated items. Linguistics and the Human sciences, 8(1), 29-61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1558/lhs.v8i1.29
  34. White, P. (2016). Evaluative contents in verbal communication. In A. Rocci & L. Saussure (Eds.), Verbal communication (pp. 77-96). Berlin, Germany: De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110255478-006
  35. Wright, G. (1997). The varieties of goodness (2nd ed.). Bristol, England: Thoemmes Press.
  36. Wright, D. (2006). The History of Lucy’s Love Life in 10 ½ Chapters. London, England: Sphere.
  37. Zirka, V. (2005). Yazykovaya paradigma manipulyativnoj igry v reklame [Language paradigm of the manipulative game in advertising]. Unpublished doctoral thesis, Dnipropetrovsk National University.

Downloads

Published

2017-12-27

How to Cite

Myroniuk, T. (2017). EVALUATIVE RESPONSES IN MODERN ENGLISH FICTION. Advanced Education, 4(8), 103–108. https://doi.org/10.20535/2410-8286.108021

Issue

2017: Issue 8

Section

Linguistics

License

Copyright (c) 2017 Tetiana Mykhailivna Myroniuk

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

    1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

    1. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

  1. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).