Implementation of Category of Evidentiality in Analytical Article of English-Language Quality Press
https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2022-11-1-67-83
Abstract
The ways of explication of evidentiality in analytical articles of the English-language press are investigated. 30 articles of newspapers “The Washington Post”, “The Guardian”, “The Independent” for 2021 are analyzed. The classification of evidential values is presented on the basis of two indicators: the source of information and its degree of reliability. Three types of evidentiality have been identified: direct evidentiality (there is a clear indication of the source of information); impersonal evidentiality (lack of an identified source of information); author’s evidentiality (based on the author’s conclusions). The results of the study showed a significant superiority of direct evidentiality (74 %), realized through the precise indication of the source of information and the use of the author’s “we”. It was revealed that impersonal evidentiality is not typical for an analytical article (6 %). This is due to its specific characteristics: the desire for objectivity and transparency of the data provided. It is noted that this type of evidentiality is realized through adverbs, indicating an anonymous source and using collective nouns. It is shown that the author’s evidentiality is found in 20 % of cases and is realized through filler words, main sentences like that means, adverbs, impersonal sentences using verbs of perception, constructions “to be + adjective with a probability value”, modal verbs.
About the Author
E. A. Nikonova
Moscow State Institute of International Relations (University) of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Ekaterina A. Nikonova - PhD in Philology.
Moscow.
References
1. Astakhova, T. N. (2018). Corpus study of prepositional groups with evidential meaning “retelling” in the German press. Bulletin of Novosibirsk State University. The series “Linguistics and intercultural communication”, 16 (2): 48—56. DOI: 10.25205/1818-7935-2018-16-2-48-56. (In Russ.).
2. Beloyedova, A. N. (2018). Category of reliability in modern journalistic texts: theoretical and practical aspect. PhD Diss. Voronezh. 246 p. (In Russ.).
3. Bybee, J. (1985). Morphology: a study of the relation between meaning and form. Amsterdam, Philadelphia: J. Benjamins. 246 p.
4. Chafe, W. (1986). Evidentiality in English conversation and academic writing. Evidentiality: the linguistic coding of epistemology in language. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Schol-ar. 261—273.
5. De Haan, F. (1999a). Evidentiality and epistemic modality: setting boundaries. Southwest journal of linguistics, 18: 339—348.
6. Du Bois, J. W. (1986). Self-evidence and ritual speech. In: Evidentiality: the linguistic coding of epistemology in language. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar. 313—336.
7. Edelman Trust Barometer. Available at: https://www.edelman.com/ (accessed 23.08.2021).
8. Fitneva, S. A. (2001). Epistemic marking and reliability judgments: evidence from Bulgarian. Journal of pragmatics, 33: 401—410. DOI: 10.1016/S0378-2166(00)00010-2.
9. Grigorenko, M. Y. (2009). The modus status of evidentiality in the modern Russian language. Bulletin of the Moscow State University. Series: Russian Philology, 4: 73—77. (In Russ.).
10. Gurajek, B. (2010). Evidentiality in English and Polish. Edinburgh: The University of Edinburgh. 146 p.
11. Ivanova, S. V., Chanysheva, Z. Z. (2014). Technologies of discursive design of rumors in the political discourse of the mass media. Political Linguistics, 2: 39—49. (In Russ.).
12. Kobrina, O. A. (2003). The category of evidentiality in modern English: Semantics and means of expression. PhD Diss. St. Petersburg. 159 p. (In Russ.).
13. Kobrina, O. A. (2005). Category of evidentiality: its status and forms of expression in different languages. Questions of cognitive linguistics, 1: 86—98. (In Russ.).
14. Kostanyan, Z. V. (2019). Adverbs of speech messages reported and allegedly as a means of transmitting someone else’s speech in the modern English-language press. Philological sciences. Questions of theory and practice, 8: 170—174. DOI: 10.30853/filnauki.2019.8.32. (In Russ.).
15. Kozlovsky, D. V. (2013). Classification of types of evidentiality on the basis of nonverbal markers of the situation. Philological sciences. Questions of theory and practice, 6 (24) / I: 99—103. (In Russ.).
16. Lazard, D. (2001). On the grammaticalization of evidantiality. Journal of Pragmatics, 33: 359—367.
17. Makartsev, M. M. (2013). Evidentiality in the space of the Balkan text. Moscow; St. Peters-burg: “Nestor-History”. 444 p. ISBN 978-5-7576-0271-4. (In Russ.).
18. Milostiva, A. I. (2016). Evidential constructions as deictic markers of a communicative subject in a newspaper narrative. Political linguistics, 5 (59): 86—91. (In Russ.).
19. Nuyts, J. (2001). Subjectivity as an evidential dimension in epistemic modal expressions. Journal of Pragmatics, 33 (3): 383—400.
20. Precht, K. (2003). Stance moods in spoken English: Evidentiality an affect in British and American conversation. Interdisciplinary Journal for the study of discourse, 23 (2): 239—257. DOI: 10.1515/text.2003.010.
21. Sabaneeva, M. K. (1999). Epistemic modality of utterance in the perspectives of pragmatics and formal logic. Language and speech activity, 2: 103—112. (In Russ.).
22. Stephens, M. (2014). Beyond news: the future of journalism. New York: Columbia University Press. 264 p.
23. Van der Auwer, J., Plungin, V. A. (1998). Modality’s semantic map. Linguistic Typology, 2: 79—124.
24. Whitt, R. (2008). Evidentiality and Perception Verbs in English and German: A Corpus-based Analysis from the Early Modern Period to the Present: PhD. Berkeley. 398 p.
25. Willet, Th. (1988). A cross-linguistic survey of the grammaticalization of evidentiality. Studies in Language, 12 (1): 51—100.
Review
For citations:
Nikonova E.A. Implementation of Category of Evidentiality in Analytical Article of English-Language Quality Press. Nauchnyi dialog. 2022;11(1):67-83. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2022-11-1-67-83
Views:
592
Email this article 