Actualization of Evaluativity as a Qualitative Category in the Discourse of English Internet Film Review

E. A. Klenova
{"title":"Actualization of Evaluativity as a Qualitative Category in the Discourse of English Internet Film Review","authors":"E. A. Klenova","doi":"10.32603/2412-8562-2023-9-1-154-166","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction. The article presents the results of the analysis aimed at identifying actualization methods of evaluativity as a qualitative category within the frames of the evaluative subgenres of expert and professional film reviews. The author assumes that evaluativity serves as a method of explicating subject's attitude towards the content of the film. The relevance of the study is determined by a lack of research dedicated to the analysis of the methods expressing author’s position within the evaluative genre of internet film review. The interconnection of evaluativity category, subject factor and modus as a method of explicating subjective meanings of the statement are analyzed.Methodology and sources. The methodology of the research is based on the classification of evaluative meanings developed by N. Arutyunova. The research methodology includes PoS tagging of the texts, identification of evaluative units including qualitative adjectives and adverbs, as well as description and comparison of leading evaluation types that actualize author's position. The methodology was studied using the example of a text corpora consisting of expert and professional film reviews extracted from the web archive of the journal of Film Criticism and the website metacritic.com.Results and discussion. With the implementation of PoS tagging and quantitative method of analysis leading evaluation categories within the corpora of the professional and expert film reviews were described and compared. The results have shown that the leading type of evaluation within the frames of the referred evaluative subgenres is represented by the emotional evaluation category. The results have also indicated that the leading evaluation types of expert evaluative discourse include prescriptive and ethical evaluation, whereas professional evaluative discourse is characterized by the prevalence of generalized evaluative units.Conclusion. The analysis allowed the author to conclude that the referred genres are characterized mainly by increased expressivity and emotiveness. However, author’s position actualization in the discourse of expert film review implicates detailed analysis of structural contents of the presented norms, as well as content of the film, whereas the discourse of professional film review is characterized by increased generalization tendency, which implicates low degree of authors’ competency.","PeriodicalId":75784,"journal":{"name":"Dental Discourse","volume":"91 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dental Discourse","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32603/2412-8562-2023-9-1-154-166","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction. The article presents the results of the analysis aimed at identifying actualization methods of evaluativity as a qualitative category within the frames of the evaluative subgenres of expert and professional film reviews. The author assumes that evaluativity serves as a method of explicating subject's attitude towards the content of the film. The relevance of the study is determined by a lack of research dedicated to the analysis of the methods expressing author’s position within the evaluative genre of internet film review. The interconnection of evaluativity category, subject factor and modus as a method of explicating subjective meanings of the statement are analyzed.Methodology and sources. The methodology of the research is based on the classification of evaluative meanings developed by N. Arutyunova. The research methodology includes PoS tagging of the texts, identification of evaluative units including qualitative adjectives and adverbs, as well as description and comparison of leading evaluation types that actualize author's position. The methodology was studied using the example of a text corpora consisting of expert and professional film reviews extracted from the web archive of the journal of Film Criticism and the website metacritic.com.Results and discussion. With the implementation of PoS tagging and quantitative method of analysis leading evaluation categories within the corpora of the professional and expert film reviews were described and compared. The results have shown that the leading type of evaluation within the frames of the referred evaluative subgenres is represented by the emotional evaluation category. The results have also indicated that the leading evaluation types of expert evaluative discourse include prescriptive and ethical evaluation, whereas professional evaluative discourse is characterized by the prevalence of generalized evaluative units.Conclusion. The analysis allowed the author to conclude that the referred genres are characterized mainly by increased expressivity and emotiveness. However, author’s position actualization in the discourse of expert film review implicates detailed analysis of structural contents of the presented norms, as well as content of the film, whereas the discourse of professional film review is characterized by increased generalization tendency, which implicates low degree of authors’ competency.
评性作为定性范畴在英语网络影评话语中的实现
介绍。本文提出了分析结果,旨在确定评价性的实现方法作为一个定性范畴,在专家和专业电影评论的评价子类型的框架内。作者认为评价性是一种说明主体对电影内容态度的方法。这项研究的相关性取决于缺乏专门研究来分析在网络电影评论的评价类型中表达作者立场的方法。分析了评价性范畴、主体因素和方式三者作为表述主观意义的一种方法之间的联系。方法和来源。该研究的方法论是基于N. Arutyunova开发的评价意义分类。研究方法包括对语篇的词性标注,定性形容词和副词等评价单位的识别,以及体现作者立场的主要评价类型的描述和比较。本文以一个文本语料库为例,该语料库由《电影评论》杂志和metacritic.com网站上的专家和专业电影评论组成。运用词性标注和定量分析的方法,对专业影评和专家影评语料库中的主要评价类别进行了描述和比较。结果表明,在被参照评价子类型框架内的主导评价类型以情感评价类为代表。专家评价性话语的主要评价类型包括规范性评价和伦理评价,而专业评价性话语的特点是普遍采用广义评价单元。通过分析,作者得出结论,所提到的体裁的特点主要是增加了表现力和情感。然而,作者在专业影评话语中的地位实现化意味着对所呈现规范的结构内容和电影内容的详细分析,而专业影评话语的特点是泛化倾向增加,这意味着作者的能力程度较低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信