2002
DOI: 10.1075/wll.5.2.04rei
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Propositional attitudes in written and spoken language

Abstract: This study considers the use of modal expressions (auxiliaries likeshould,can), semi-modals (e.g.have to,be likely to), and adverbials and complement-taking expressions (maybe, it is possible that) to convey the attitudes and feelings of speaker/writers about the events they describe and the ideas they express. The topic of “propositional attitudes” thus overlaps with the domains of linguistic analysis known as “mood and modality.” This paper considers selected facets of linguistic modality in developmental an… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
17
0
4

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 46 publications
(22 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
1
17
0
4
Order By: Relevance
“…Borrowing tools from systemic functional linguistics (Halliday, 2004) and applying a pragmatics-based framework for analyzing academic language (Snow & Uccelli, 2009), our study explores well-established measures of lexical diversity (how many different words are used in an essay), syntactic complexity (how complex are the clauses used), and lexical density (how much information is packed into a single clause) in high school students’ persuasive essays (Schleppegrell, 2004). In addition, informed by prior research on textual analysis (Hyland, 2005) and developmental linguistics studies on adolescents’ stance—or propositional attitudes (Berman, Ragnarsdóttir, & Strömqvist, 2002; Reilly, Baruch, Jisa, & Berman, 2002)—we investigate two more innovative discourse dimensions: discourse organization and writer’s stance. Organization and stance constitute two dimensions that are present from the onset of discourse development.…”
Section: The Linguistic Demands Of Academic Writingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…Borrowing tools from systemic functional linguistics (Halliday, 2004) and applying a pragmatics-based framework for analyzing academic language (Snow & Uccelli, 2009), our study explores well-established measures of lexical diversity (how many different words are used in an essay), syntactic complexity (how complex are the clauses used), and lexical density (how much information is packed into a single clause) in high school students’ persuasive essays (Schleppegrell, 2004). In addition, informed by prior research on textual analysis (Hyland, 2005) and developmental linguistics studies on adolescents’ stance—or propositional attitudes (Berman, Ragnarsdóttir, & Strömqvist, 2002; Reilly, Baruch, Jisa, & Berman, 2002)—we investigate two more innovative discourse dimensions: discourse organization and writer’s stance. Organization and stance constitute two dimensions that are present from the onset of discourse development.…”
Section: The Linguistic Demands Of Academic Writingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One prior cross- and cross-sectional study has documented a shift from a deontic to an epistemic stance in the oral and written discourse of adolescents (Reilly et al, 2002). The authors claim that the deontic stance is related to the cultural worldviews and value systems into which children are socialized from early on.…”
Section: The Linguistic Demands Of Academic Writingmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Across different languages, written texts contain more, and more diverse, content words than spoken texts, as well as longer words and word combinations (Biber 2009b), longer and more complex noun phrases based on abstract nominals with different modifications (Halliday 2006;Ravid & Cahana-Amitay 2005), especially in the grammatical subject position , longer clauses and larger combinations of clause packages . Compared to spoken texts, written texts are generally characterized by more distanced, detached, and objective stance (Du Bois 2007;Englebretson 2007), which is expressed by agent demoting structures and abstract lexical choice (Berman 2005a;Reilly et al 2002;Tolchinsky & Rosado 2005).…”
Section:  Linguistic Aspects Of Speech and Writingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As befits its scene-setting function, the information this unit carries is descriptive and interpretative rather than eventive (Berman 1997;Ravid & Berman 2006). Accordingly, all verbs are cognitive or metaphorical (recall, studied, work with, enrich), with the second half of the unit expressing epistemic propositional attitude regarding the expected (and hypothetical) fruitful cooperation (Reilly et al 2002). Temporal and locative settings (the previous year at University and school) are not specific.…”
Section: Content Units In Disappointmentmentioning
confidence: 99%