Lingua inglese 2

INGLESE

Discourse: texts, context, actions, interactions, power + ideology, not only written texts but also

ICONIC TEXTS.

MULTIMODAL TEXTS:

ICONIC TEXTS

WRITTEN TEXTS

SPOKEN TEXTS

KINETIC TEXTS

they are co-deployed=> all together.

> multimodal: many modes, these modes are called semiotic modes. SEMIOTIC= SIGNS.

> Spoken/written modes of a language: different semiotic modes.

> Gesture and hyperlink--> part of kinetic mode.

> Example: web page is multimodal--> visual mode (colours, images), written mode, kinetic mode

(dynamic page: links). Framing devices--> you split the information, so you frame it. Separation:

not a border, but a space between the image and the first article. Page divided in a tryptic.

> Texts are most of the time multimodal.

THE PROPERTIES OF A TEXT:

TEXTURE: created through cohesion and coherence => how the parts, the sentences are linked

together.

COHESION: two types:

- lexical cohesion: lexical terms, related words to a specific field of knowledge.

example: politic--> words related to this field. Technical terms linked to this field. RELATED

WORDS. A text can have different DISCOURSES: example--> the discourse of the law and

the discourse of society. Every discourse has got its specific words related together.

Different kinds of word-relations: HYPERNYM AND HYPONYMS

> Example: Europe is the hypernym/hyperonym of all the countries which make part of it. \

Germany, France, Italy, ...--> hyponyms.

In linguistics, a hyponym= is a word or phrase whose semantic field is included within that of

another word, its hyperonym/hypernym.

In simpler terms, a hyponym shares a type-of relationship

with its hypernym.

For example, pigeon, crow, eagle and seagull are all

hyponyms of bird (their hypernym); which, in turn, is a

hyponym of animal

SYNONYMS--> in order not to repeat a word.

REPETITIONS--> we can find repetitions with a change of class. Example: presecutor/

prosecutorial.

COLLOCATIONS: example--> to address a problem, instead of "to face".

- grammatical cohesion: PRONOUNS = to substitute the names. Also called reference

words. Referred to a noun or a noun phrase. IT = NOUN, NOUN PHRASE.

CONJUNCTIONS: ex. BUT = conjunction, it creates a cohesion between the sentences

or inside the sentences.

SUBSTITUTE: ex. SO = it substitutes the whole sentence.

"clean your room!" "why?" "because I said SO”

"I prefer the blue ONE".

LEGAL TEXTS

> THEORY behind the legal discourse

> the legal discourse is made of technical terminology + ideology

> specific field of knowledge

> the legal discourse can be linked to the social discourse

> prosecutorial

> written text has specific rules

> redundant

———————————————————————————————————————————

FROM ANGELA DAVIES

“THE IMPORTANCE OF PROSECUTIONAL DISCRETION” > fotocopia 2

REFERENCE are linked to > WORD, NAME, TEXT

the reference: “our” is > external of the text

> esophoric reference (endophoric: reference we can find inside the text)

“despite” > connective device (meglio dire: contrastive connective device)

> opposes the first part

> the law can be used as a reference to the discourse about society and democracy

> “holding people accountable” > collocation (hold SB accountable)

> typical expression of legal english

> repetition: “Prosecutorial”, “prosecutor’s”

> adj that specifies: prosecutorial discretion

process for holding people accountable = noun post modified with a

prepositional phrase introduced with for…

justice system

all-important decision of whether an individual = post and pre modified

= nouns that are post modified (=> prepositional phrase => more details) or pre modified

(prosecutor’s duty)

> “exercise sb’s constitutional right to a trial” > expression typical of LEGAL english

> Collocations are expressions which consist of two or more words which frequently appear

together. These may involve adjectives and nouns (e.g. ‘a derisory offer’ or ‘a binding contract’),

verbs and nouns (‘to fulfill obligations’ or ‘to cast aspersions’), adverbs and nouns (‘legally valid’ or

‘wholly fraudulent’).

MODALITY

> essential= high degree modal word

> present tense > index of categorical modality

> should be charged > opinion of cause-effect

> categorical present tense > she explains the process => no opinion (only at the beginning

when she says “essential”)

> always > frequency value in time

> most people > frequency in numbers

“THE DILEMMA OF PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION” > fotocopia 2

> repetition

> syntax is complex

> long sentences

> noun groups are complex

> “their effort” > we have their that refers to “the judicial and legislative branches” that come after.

> usually it should come before the pronoun

> It should be: in AN effort > perfect english > but here there is no AN, they

> precise in terms of the agencies: who do the effort => THEIR => THEY

> MORE PRECISE AND REDUNDANT

> “Consequently” = cause/effect connective

> formality, register of the language

> legal english is HIGHLY FORMAL => instead of using thus, so they use

CONSEQUENTLY

> HYCRONISMS and HYPERNYMS: “executive branch, police, presidents, governors, public

official” “power and privilege”

MODALITY

> essential > modality value

> categorical modality

> unlike > modal

> exposition SECOND PART

> “we”= esophoric reference

> “circumvent” formal word for avoid

> “them” > device that points to the prosecutor

> “accountability that…” > post-modified noun

> “whom” legal english > every word needs to be very detailed > no elliptical expression >

remarking every reference

> “while” = time connective

> the meaning is referring to a time connection

> “affording” is a synonym of “giving”

> “grant” is a synonym of “giving” and “affording”

> “more power than” = comparison

> linguistic feature

> justaxposition > putting one thing that is the opposite of the other > those who…

> they are different from the other people who take power

NEGATIVE AND POSITIVE EVALUATION ARGUMENTS related to the agents of the sentence

> look for the agent and understand if in the text there are positive or negative evaluation of that

subject > prosecutorial discretion= agent > essential= positive evaluation

> abuse= negative evaluation

> evaluation point of view: positive or negative

> coherence and cohesion (between clauses)

> legal discourse > lots of details

> EVALUATION: positive: > “is essential”

> “all important”

> the meaning of the first phrase of “the dilemma of prosecutorial

discretion”

>> “but” => negative evaluation

> “have failed” negative evaluation

> “have escaped” negative evaluation

> “not surprisingly” > evaluation

> “nonexistent or woefully inadequate” > negativ evaluation

> “is important” > positive evaluation

> “unfortunate” > negative evaluation

> “fortunate” > positive evaluation

> “we have given prosecutors a pass” > positive evaluation

> “most important” > positive evaluation

> “despite”= element of cohesion between the main clause and the other clauses

> the second/third phrases are descriptive

———————————————————————————————————————————

INTERVIEW TO M. ALEXANDER

“DAVE DAVIES TEXT” > fotocopia 2

> “staggering” = overwhelming

> informal words => in everyday language

> pre-modified the adverb “truly”

> African-Americans under correction control, in prison or jail > post modified

> parole and probation > legal term

> comparison: “today there are more… than”

> never precise in quotation and reference, date, figures, number

> in fact = connective device

> “in major American cities today” > specification of the place

> “thus” > simple english, informal

> spoken text > makes reference to “now, today” > space and time

> “it” refers to the problem that is mentioned in the question > cohesive link between 2 sentences,

2 clauses, and between 2 conversational terms

——————————————————————————————————————————

MULTIMODALITY > different semiotic modes > one typical of the digital discourse is KINETIC

MODE (=> movement)

DIALOGIC FORMS

INTERTEXTUALITY:

> the use of links in order to show the source that the author is using in order to speak about the

facts related to the topic > words that are in a different colour (collegamento testuale)

> another example of intertextuality is when I quote sb, or talk about some texts from different

authors

> virtual link

> In this way our text is more authoritative

> the article is based on facts => I provide links to other text, quotations etc

> everything that will appears in the webpage is decided and written by Tim Wise or related to him

> articles mentioned at the end > dialogic form but not interactive

> comments are interactive > dialogic form

> Internet > establish common text

> twitter

———————————————————————————————————————————

pag 76

Tatcher > “we”, “British people”= in group VS “Commonwealth”, “immigrant” =outgroup

> stereotypes the moral values of the British people

> “here”= context

> “lot”= 4 million people

> “people”= British people

> “swamped” > metaphor

> become dirty place through immigration

> quality of in-group are positive

> “afraid” refers to the British

> She was accused of racism but in reality she is not mentioning physical qualities of

anything that could be referred to racism > METAMESSAGE

> the way of framing what she says from the perspective of the in-group and outgroup

> indirectness

> When we create in-groups and out groups we can create stereotypes > use of stereotypes to

challenge the assumption of the reader

> we have experience and we use category

> Kennedy moral values from the Constitution to give importance to his message

———————————————————————————————————————————

pag 11 libro Discourse 2.0

> Twitter > problem: the constraint= 140 characters => you have to say what you want to say

> takes sth that a person twitted => retwitting what the other person said in another twit

> repetition => context and cohesion

> retwitting= agree with what is has been said => positive evaluation

> abbreviation of the whole title because there is a constraint

> we change the way we write according to the affordance of the medium

> depending on what the medium imposes me = 140 words => I have to abbreviate

> I’m commenting on sth that I quoted > email

> B had previously responded to A point by point, interleaving his text with text by A

> quoting the repeated material is set off on a separate line

———————————————————————————————————————————

cap 6 pag 105 METAMESSAGE (DISCOURSE 2.0)

> example of contrastive explication on the people that are chatting

> we are creating a message and a metamessage= when we write sth or say sth there is the

meaning of the message + the intention of the writer, the purpose that can be very important but it

can be also trivial => I’m giving you this information

> I interpret the message according to my values

> the brother isn’t very polite but his sister acknowledges that he is very sarcastic

> she doesn’t expect her brother to be very distant > she thought her brother would have

answered her in an exciting way => she was disappointed

> she uses sarcasm to highlight her being upset

> brother denied having communicate indifference and it wasn’t his metamessage to

communicate that => she misjudged his metamessage

> we communicate sth but there is an intention: metamessage

pag 68

> TV they interpret for us any kind of news and tries to frame the metamessage => we can

interpret what a person is saying

> Fox channel

> they are interweaving the senator and making him speak about a specific event that was against

the IRS that were doing sth wrong and were targeting some specific political organization

> the program is part if a news channel

> “enemies list&rdq