Under `intertextual positioning', we are concerned with uses of language by which writers/speakers adopt evaluative positions towards what they represent as the views and statements of other speakers and writers, towards the propositions they represent as deriving from outside sources. At its most basic, intertextual positioning is brought into play when a writer/speaker chooses to quote or reference the words or thoughts of another.
Strictly speaking, intertextual positioning is a sub-type of dialogistic positioning. Such attributions can be seen as dialogistic from several perspectives. If the person quoted is actually present in the current communicative situation (for example as a participant in a group conversation or as the recipient of a letter in which the attribution is made) then the speaker/writer clearly engages with them interactively by quoting them. But even when the quoted source is not so obviously an interactive participant, they, or at least their socio-semiotic position, is nevertheless engaged with dialogistically by being included in the current text and thereby being evaluated in some way. Here the dialogistic position is essentially retrospective. The speaker/writer represents themselves as referring back to what has been said or thought previously. But such intertextuality is also prospective in that attributions can act to position the speaker/writer's current utterances with respect to anticipated responses from actual or potential interlocutors. For example, by a formulation such as `a few minor critics have claimed that Vermeer employed a camera obscured', the speaker/writer indicates to actual or potential respondents that they, the speaker/writer, are not strongly committed to the proposition and thereby indicates a readiness to acknowledge and engage with alternative position.
The prospective dialogism of such attribution will be taken up in much more detail in a later section and for the moment my observations will be confined to introducing some of the key issues concerning the way a speaker/writer indicates what evaluative stance they take towards attributed material.
When a speaker/writer cites the words of thoughts of another, at the very least they indicate that these attributed elements are in some way relevant to his/her current communicative purposes. Thus the most basic mode evaluative stance to intertextual material is one of implied `relevance'.
Once an attributed proposition has been included (and hence evaluated as `relevant') it can the be further evaluated as `endorsed' or `disendorsed'. The endorsed utterance is one which the writer either directly in indirectly indicates support for, or agreement with. The endorsed utterance is represented as true, reliable, convincing or at least worthy of consideration.
Thus,
He punctures the romantic myth that the mafia started as Robin Hood-style groups of men protecting the poor. He shows that the mafia began in the 19th century as armed bands protecting the interests of the absentee landlords who owned most of Sicily. He also demonstrates how the mafia has forged links with Italy's ruling Christian Democrat party since the war, and how the state has fought to destroy the criminal organisation despite the terror campaign that assassinated anti-mafia judges, such as Giovanni Falcone. (From the Cobuild Bank of English)
Here the use of the quoting verbs `show' and `demonstrate' signals endorsement for the attributed author's observations about the Mafia. Thus the writer represents themselves as sharing responsibility for the proposition with the quoted source.
Similarly,
Elsewhere, he espoused the thesis, convincingly propounded also by other Marxists, that Marx evolved from his Eurocentric perspective of the 1850s towards a stance of anti-colonialism and of rejection of the unqualified idea that the capitalist destruction of pre-capitalist agrarian structures was necessary and inevitable. (Cobuild: UKBooks)
Under disendorsement, writers/speakers distances themselves from the utterance, indicating that they take no responsibility for its reliability. This is commonly done by the use of a quoting verb such as `to claim' and `allege'. Thus,
Tickner said regardless of the result, the royal commission was a waste of money and he would proceed with a separate inquiry into the issue headed by Justice Jane Matthews. His attack came as the Aboriginal women involved in the demanded a female minister examine the religious beliefs they claim are inherent in their fight against a bridge to the island near Goolwa in South Australia. (Bank of English: OzNews)
Here, of course, the journalist distances him/herself from - or `disendorses' - the proposition put by the Aborigional women that they have religious reasons to oppose the building of the bridge.
Similarly,
Even in jail there are many rumours circulating about Tyson. One is that he has converted to Islam and will be known as Malik Abdul Aziz. Another rumour is that he is engaged to a childhood sweetheart and he is regularly allowed to have sex with the girl about to become Mrs Tyson-or Mrs Aziz. He reportedly said, We're keeping the date of the wedding secret. I don't want people to know her name (UKMags)
One quite common and interesting mechanism for more indirectly indicating dis-endorsement is to characterise the utterance as unexpected or surprising.
Surprisingly, McGuinness is especially scathing about `the chattering classes', of which he has long been a member. (Dissent: p.6, Number 4, Summer 2000/2001)
Disendorsement can, however, go beyond such `distancing' to the point of absolute rejection or denial of the attributed proposition. Thus,
More recent evaluation in the field convinces me that the ANU team are seriously in error: the age of the burial is considerably less than 62,000 years. In this context, the claim that "this more than trebles the date for humanity's first arrival on the continent" is sheer nonsense. (The Australian, Opinion Pages, 10/01/2001)
This introduction was intended to provide a very broad-brush overview of the type of linguistic issues covered by the Appraisal issue. It has outlined the two core concerns of Appraisal: how speakers/writers adopt and indicate positive or negative attitudes and how they negotiate these attitudinal and other types of positionings with actual or potential dialogic partners. In following sections these and related issues will be taken up in more detail.
Martin
