2009 3 M a r.

2009
30 2 Fore ign Language E du cation V o.l 30 No. 2

( 100871)

: M artin ,

M a rtin 2000, 2003 ,
M a rtin W h ite 2005 5 6, 5 6
,
: ; ; ;
: H 030 : A : 1000-5544( 2009) 02-0001-06
Abstrac t: Th is paper discusses the re lationship between the d iscourse sem antics and appra isal system propo sed by M artin.
T he author first d iscusses the content o f discourse sem antics, argu ing that the d iscourse system s of nego tiation, identification,
conjunction and idea tion are the cen tral part of discourse sem antics. T hen the autho r turns to the appraisa l system o fficia lly
proposed by M artin in his w ritings in 2000 and 2003. In the end, the autho r, on the basis o fThe L anguage of Evaluation pub-
lished in 2005 by M artin and W hite in particular, po ints out tha t the appraisa l system is one o f the discourse sy stem s o f dis-
course sem antics. T he pub lication ofT he Language of Evaluation signa ls that the appra isa l theo ry has entered a m ature stag e
and becom e the banner o f discourse semantics now.
K ey word s: d iscourse sem antics; d iscourse system; appra isal system; interpe rsonal m ean ing

,



, / 0 / 0 1992
, H a lliday /
/ 0 d iscourse seman tics - . 0 , /
, , ( ) ,
, ( N ijm egen Un ivers-i - . , - .
ty) P ieter A. M. S euren 1985 0 ( H alliday 2003 [ 1992] : 210)
5 6, 2001 5 6, / 0
, M artin
N icho las A sher 2004 / 1979
0 2001 , , 1992 , 5
/ 0 ) ) ) 6( M artin 1992: x iii)
2003, 5 6 ,
5 6 / ) ) )
0,
) ) ) M artin , / 5 6,
, , 5 6
, : , ( )
, , (
/ 0 appraisal system , ) 5 6 (
/ 0 evaluation ) , 5 6
# 1#
 ) ) ) , ( ,
) ,
, , , ,
0 (M artin 1992: 1 ) ,
? M art in
, H all-i
, day( 1985) ,
H alliday, / 0
: , , M art in H alliday

( 1 ) Ford is sm iling because T rillian arrived. , ,
( 2 ) It p leased Ford th at T rillian has arrived. H alliday / 0
( 3 ) Ford is happy that T rillian has arrived. ( M art in / 0
1992: 16 ) ( ad jacency pa irs):
,
, H alliday ,
M artin ,
, , ,
(M artin 1992: 29, 10 ), ,
, H allid ay H asan( 1976 )
, , ) ) ) exophora, / 0/ 0
/ 0/ 0 M artin
, ( ) ( 1992 ) ,
, H a lliday H asan ( retrieval network )
, , / 0
, ( referen ce chain s ) , H asan / 0 ( iden tity
M art in, ch ain s) ,

, , , ,
,
H artford /
(M art in 1992: 19 ) 0 ( participant lin es) (M artin 1992: 141 )
M art in, , ,
, , Ha lliday H asan ( 1976 )
, / 0, 4 : ( add itive)
( adversat ive) ( causal) ( temporal)
, ( external) ( in tern al)
, M artin( 1992) H allid ay H asan
( 60% ) ( add itive) ( comparative) ( temporal)
) ) ) ( negotiat ion ) ( iden tification ) ( con sequen tial)
( con jun ct ion ) ( ideation) M artin /,
( ( M artin 1992: 178 ) ,
) , , , , ,
( sem ios is);
, / 0,
, / 0 ( M artin 1992: 178-180 )
, ,


# 2#
 , / 0
, H alliday H asan / ( posit ive) / 0 ( negat ive) ( 4 ) ( 5 )( 7 )
0 , , torn to p ieces, pain, b itterness, w ithd rawn, p ress h is
M art in H alliday face in to h is hand s, shake uncon trollab ly
/ 0 , ( 6) ecstatic
(M art in 1992: 292 ), / 1 ) , / 0
( taxonom ies); 2 ) ( d irect)/ 0 ( m
i p licit),
( con figurations) , , torn to p ieces, pa in, b itterness,
; 3 ) ecstatic,
( activity sequ ences) 0 ( M artin 1992: 292 ) , w ithdrawn, press h is face in to h is hands,
, : shake un con trollab ly,
1 ) ) ) ) - - /; ,
2 ) ) ) ) / + + 0: very qu iet, drink ing too mu ch
- - ;
3 ) ) ) ) - -
(M art in 1992: 293 ) , ,
/ 0 ( person al) ( moral)

/ 0 ( adm ire),
M art in / 0 ( criticize) ; / 0
2000 , Su san Hun ston G eoffrey Thompson ( pra ise) , / 0 ( cond emn )
5 ) ) ) 6, ( 8) ( 9 )( 10) ( 11 ) ; ( 8) ( 9)
M artin / ) ) ) 0 2003 , ( 10)( 11) ; ( 8)( 10 ), ( 9)
, M art in Rose 5 ) ) ) ( 11) ( 12 )( 13 )( 14 )( 15)

6, ; ( 12)( 13) , ( 14)( 15) ; ( 12 )
( 14), ( 13 )( 15)
) ) ) ( 8) [ he was] A bubb ly, v ivac ious m an who beam ed
(, ) ou t w ild energy. Sharp ly in telligent. ( )
, : ( 9) H e w as work ing in a top security structure. (
)
, , ( 10) W h at. s w rong w ith h m
i ? . . . I can. t h and le the
, man anymore! (
)
( 11) I can . t exp lain the pain and b itterness in me
/ 0 ( attitude)/ 0 ( graduation ) ( en- when I saw what was left of that b eau tifu ,l b ig, strong per-
gagem ent) son. ( )
( 12) . . . at least th eir leaders h ave th e gu ts to stand
/ 0 ( affect) , ( by their vu ltures, to recogn ize th eir sacrifices. . . . (
/ 0 ) / 0 ( judgem en t) , ( )
/ 0 ) / 0 ( app reciation ) , ( 13) I envy and respect the peop le of th e strugg le. . . .
: ( )
( 4 ) I w as torn to pieces. ( 14) Ou r leaders are too holy and innocen t. And face-
( 5) I can . t exp la in the pain and bitterness in less. (
)
m e. . . . ( 15) . . . - those at the top . were again target ing the
( 6 ) W e were ecstatic. next -permanen t removal from soc iety. . . . . (
( 7 ) H e becam e very qu iet. W ithdrawn. Som etm
i es )
h e wou ld just press his face in to h is hands and shake un- ( M artin and R ose 2003: 30, )
controllably. I realized h e was d rink ing too much. , ,
( M artin and Rose 2003: 25-7, ) , a beau tifu l relat ion sh ip, a very sens-i
# 3#
t ive issue, h ealing of b reach es, redressing of m
i balan ces : / 0 ( force) / 0 ( fo-
, my un successfu l marriages, a frivolous qu es- cu s) ( in-
t ion, b roken relation sh ips, th e commun ity he or she h as in- tens ifier), very, extremely, qu ite , best,
ju red better, m ore, too /
M art in Rose, , 0 ( attitud in al lex is)
/ 0 / 0, , ( sharpen ) ( soften) ,
S tev ie Ray Vaughan 5 6( T ex- , real policem en real po licem an
as F lood ) / And the new ly includ- , k ind o,f sort
ed bonus numb ers ( . . . ) illum in ate th e raw sou l and pas- of rea l , k ind o,f sort
sion th at propelled h is artistry even when he w as und er the of
spe ll of d rug add iction. 0 V augh an ) ) )
, , ; ,
V aughan ( , , It was the beg inn ing of a beau tifu l relat ionsh ip
), , , , Th en h e says: H e
, (M art in and and th ree of ou r friend s have b een promoted. -W e. re mov-
Rose 2003: 36) ing to a special un it. N ow, now m y darling. W e are real po-
, licemen. . M art in Rose Bakh tin
, / 0 ( m onog loss)/ 0 ( heterogloss)
:
1 ) ,

2 ) ,
M artin 2000,
3 ) , , , 1992 5 6
( 31 91, 461 498 )
4 ) , , / 0
5 ) , ; , ( M artin 2000: 143 )
,
6 ) / , / , / 2003 5 6 / 0, M artin
R ose, 5 6 ,
, ( pro- ( M artin and Rose 2003: x i)
posal) ( the in stitu tion alization of fee-l ,
ing), ( ) / (
, : ( social esteem ) , ) ) ) ) 0 ( M ar-

( social sanction) tin and R ose 2003: 22)
, , 2005 , M art in W h ite 5
, ) ) ) 6,
, , 5 6
( p ropos-i 5 6 5
t ion ), ( p rod- 6 ,
u cts and perform ances)
: ( react ion ) ( composit ion ) ( va lua-
t ion ): ,
(: ), ( : /

) ( : ,
) (: ) , ( );

, ( ) ;
# 4#
 ( ); , )) ) ( a-
f
( ) ( ); fect) Poyn ton 1985
, , , ( ) 0 ( M ar- ,
t in and W h ite 2005: 9) 5 6 , M artin W h ite ,
, / , ,
, ,
, ) ) ) ( invo lvem ent )
S tev ie Ray V aughan ,
S tev ie R ay: ( M art in 1992 ) , ,
( 16 ) aw esom e! aw esom e! awesome! aw esom e! it. s , [ ten-
very worth buy ing. oh d id i say th at it. s aw esom e! thank or], ( so lidarity)
you. stev ie ray! ( M artin and W h ite 2005: 10) Poyn ton
, , , ( ) (
17), , ) , , ,
,
( 17) an interesting con trast in sty les ,
ad jective ( Ep ithet)
the con trast in sty les in terested m e verb ( Process) 0 ( M artin and W h ite 2005: 33-4 )
in terestingly, there. s a con trast in sty les 2007 , M artin Rose 5 6
adverb ( Comm en t A d junct) ) ) )
( M artin and W h ite 2005: 10) , 5 6 5
, , 6 , 5 6
, ( 17) 5 6

( 18) the con trast in styles is of con siderab le in terest
( M artin and W h ite 2005: 10)

, ( 17 )
, con trast , d i-f M art in 1992
feren t: ,
( 19 ) H is overall app earan ce, h is stage p resence, even
h is p lay ing sty le are qu ite d ifferen t in th e two show s. 5 6 M artin
( M artin and W h ite 2005: 10) , H alliday
M art in 5 6 1990
, , ,
M artin 2000 / 0 2003
, 5 6, M art in 5 6
, ( , M artin
) , ) ) ) 2005
, / 0 ( att-i 5 6,
tude netw ork) ( M artin 1992: 16 ) ,
) ) ) *
, ,

,
, / 0 , , 5
6 10 46 586 :
MODULAT ION , MODULA- / 0 ( Sh ap ing m ean ing
T ION th rough d ialogu e) ( 11 )

# 5#
[ 5] Langacker, R. W. T en L ectures on Cogn itive Gramm ar[ M ] . , 1981( 2 ).
. : , 2007. [ 16] . [ M ] . :
[ 6] Q u irk, R. et a.l A Com prehensive G rammar of the Eng lish L anguage , 2007.
[ M ] . London: Longm an G roup L td. , 1985. [ 17] . [ J]. , 2001( 1) .
[ 7] S inclair, J. et a.l Collins Cobu ild Engl ish G ramma r [ M ]. London: [ 18] , . ( II) ( ) . :
H arper C ollin s Pub lishers Ltd. , 1990. , 2004.
[ 8] U ngerer, F. & H. J. S chm id. An Introdu ction to Cogn itive L ingu istics [ 19] . [ J] . , 1994( 3) .
[ M ] . London: Longm an, 1996. : ,
2001. : ( N 05YY 08)
[ 9] . [ J] . , 1999 ( 4) . , /
[ 10 ] . [ M ] . : , 1987. 0,
[ 11 ] . [ J] . , 1980 ( 2) .
: , , ,
[ 12 ] . [ M ] . : , 2000.
:

[ 13 ] . [ J ]. , 1998
( 3 ).
[ 14 ] . [ J] . , 1988( 2 ).
2008-09-10
[ 15 ] . [ J] .

( 5 ) text like a clause? [ A ] R eprin ted in O n G rammar [ C] . London: Con-

H all iday H asan( 1976: 4) , ( p resuppose) t inuum, 1981 / 2002.
, , , [ 2] H alliday, M. A. K. An In troduc tion to Func tiona l G ramma r [ M ].
M artin / 0, ( 1994, 2nd ed. ) . London: E dw ard A rnold, 1985.
, / 0 ( presum p- [ 3] H all iday, M. A. K. S ystem ic gramm ar and the concept of a / scien ce
t ion) ( 1992: 101 ) of language0 [ A ] . R eprin ted in On L anguage and L inguistics [ C ].
, London: Con tinuum, 1992 / 2003.
2003 , 2000 [ 4] H al liday, M. A. K. & H asan, R. Coh esion in Engl ish [ M ] . London:
Longm an, 1976.
, / 0 / 0, / 0 [ 5] M art in, J. R. Eng lish Text: System and S truc ture [ M ] . Am sterdam:
/ 0, John B en jam ins, 1992.
2007, [ 6 ] M artin, J. R. B eyond exch ange: APPRA ISA L system s in E nglish
2003, 2000 [ A ] . In H unston, S. & Thom pson, G. ( eds. ) . Eva lua tion in Text:
, : Au thoria l S tance and th e C onstruction of D i scourse [ C ] . O xford: O x-
. . . . R eaction has to do ford U n ivers ity Press, 2000.
a ttention ( reac tion: im pact) and the em o tiona l im pact it has on [ 7] M art in, J. R. & R ose, D. W orking w ith D iscourse: M eaning beyond
2003: 63-4 usw ith the degree to w h ich the tex t /process in question captures
our the C lau se [ M ] . ( 2007, 2nd ed. ). London: C ont inuum, 2003.
( reaction: qua lity) . [ 8 ] M art in, J. R. & W h ite, P. The L anguage of Eva lua tion: Appra isal in
. . . . R eaction has to do
w ith the deg ree to w hich the tex t/ process in question captures E ng lish [ M ] . N ew Y ork: PalgraveM acm illan, 2005.
2000: 160 our atten tion ( reaction: im pact) and the em otional impact it ha s
on us
( reaction: qua lity) . : , ,


M art in 2000, 1992 5 6
( M artin, 2000: 150
7 )
2008-06-12

[ 1] H alliday, M. A. K. Text sem an tics and clause gramm ar: H ow is a

# 11#