Previous PageTable Of ContentsNext Page

Return to Appraisal Homepage

3. Attitude/Appreciation 2

Distinguishing Appreciation from Judgement

The instances of APPRECIATION which can, perhaps, be most easily distinguished from JUDGEMENT values are those involving aesthetic evaluation of physical objects or material circumstances/state of affairs - for example, `a beautiful sunset', `an ugly scar', `a striking vista', `the sleek lines of the E-type Jaguar', `the squat, constricted form of the Morris Minor'. Such assessments clearly do not reference human behaviour, at least not directly. They don't involve assessments of right and wrong or correct and incorrect. While negative values of JUDGEMENT attribute some sense of `blame' to the human participant who is thereby evaluated, this is not the case with negative values of APPRECIATION. To `blame' a Morris Minor for being `squat' would, in most contexts be incongruous (unless, of course, we are seeking to humanise or personify the car for our own argumentative or poetic purposes). This follows naturally from the fact that JUDGEMENT assumes the involvement of human consciousness, volition or intentionality. Accordingly, values of JUDGEMENT (at least in their adjectival form) can be slotted into the collocational frames of the type `It was corrupt of the Minister to accept these payments'; `It was dishonest of you not to tell her. `It was brave of Mary to stand her ground'; `It was clever of you to hide your wallet in the vegetables'; `It was eccentric of you to wear that hat.' (Collocational frame = It was Judgement-Value of Judged to Verbal Process). This is not possible of values of APPRECIATION. Thus the following would be incongruous - It was beautiful of the sunset to light up the sky like that. / It was ugly of the scar to gape like that.

Previous PageTop Of PageTable Of ContentsNext Page

Return to Appraisal Homepage