Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Tracing facework over time using semi-automated...

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Tracing facework over time using semi-automated methods

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Tracing facework over time using semi-automated methods. / Archer, Dawn; Malory, Beth.
In: International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, Vol. 22, No. 1, 31.01.2017, p. 27-56.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Archer, D & Malory, B 2017, 'Tracing facework over time using semi-automated methods', International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 27-56. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.22.1.02arc

APA

Archer, D., & Malory, B. (2017). Tracing facework over time using semi-automated methods. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 22(1), 27-56. https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.22.1.02arc

Vancouver

Archer D, Malory B. Tracing facework over time using semi-automated methods. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics. 2017 Jan 31;22(1):27-56. doi: 10.1075/ijcl.22.1.02arc

Author

Archer, Dawn ; Malory, Beth. / Tracing facework over time using semi-automated methods. In: International Journal of Corpus Linguistics. 2017 ; Vol. 22, No. 1. pp. 27-56.

Bibtex

@article{9290dca86a444d06b29f919e8acd638b,
title = "Tracing facework over time using semi-automated methods",
abstract = "Impolite behaviour tends to attract more evaluative comment than other facework, making it easier to investigate synchronically and diachronically. A reliance on metapragmatic commentary is not optimum for UK parliamentary studies, however, as MPs cannot use “insulting or rude language” that breaks the chamber{\textquoteright}s “rules of politeness” (www​.parliament​.uk). The work reported here thus offers three innovative methods of tracing MPs{\textquoteright} facework as they negotiated the “unparliamentary language” prohibition, and the results gleaned when the methods were applied to Hansard records (1812–2004). Method 1 prioritises portmanteau tags made up of USAS semtags. Method 2 prioritises themes derived from the HTOED. Method 3 draws on {\textquoteleft}meaning constellations{\textquoteright} (i.e. simultaneous searches of multiple tags). The UK parliamentary website highlights the “considerable ingenuity” displayed by MPs in order to circumvent their unparliamentary language prohibition. All methods have found examples of such ingenuity, many of which are characterized by multiple facework intentions (Archer 2015).",
author = "Dawn Archer and Beth Malory",
year = "2017",
month = jan,
day = "31",
doi = "10.1075/ijcl.22.1.02arc",
language = "English",
volume = "22",
pages = "27--56",
journal = "International Journal of Corpus Linguistics",
issn = "1384-6655",
publisher = "John Benjamins Publishing Company",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Tracing facework over time using semi-automated methods

AU - Archer, Dawn

AU - Malory, Beth

PY - 2017/1/31

Y1 - 2017/1/31

N2 - Impolite behaviour tends to attract more evaluative comment than other facework, making it easier to investigate synchronically and diachronically. A reliance on metapragmatic commentary is not optimum for UK parliamentary studies, however, as MPs cannot use “insulting or rude language” that breaks the chamber’s “rules of politeness” (www​.parliament​.uk). The work reported here thus offers three innovative methods of tracing MPs’ facework as they negotiated the “unparliamentary language” prohibition, and the results gleaned when the methods were applied to Hansard records (1812–2004). Method 1 prioritises portmanteau tags made up of USAS semtags. Method 2 prioritises themes derived from the HTOED. Method 3 draws on ‘meaning constellations’ (i.e. simultaneous searches of multiple tags). The UK parliamentary website highlights the “considerable ingenuity” displayed by MPs in order to circumvent their unparliamentary language prohibition. All methods have found examples of such ingenuity, many of which are characterized by multiple facework intentions (Archer 2015).

AB - Impolite behaviour tends to attract more evaluative comment than other facework, making it easier to investigate synchronically and diachronically. A reliance on metapragmatic commentary is not optimum for UK parliamentary studies, however, as MPs cannot use “insulting or rude language” that breaks the chamber’s “rules of politeness” (www​.parliament​.uk). The work reported here thus offers three innovative methods of tracing MPs’ facework as they negotiated the “unparliamentary language” prohibition, and the results gleaned when the methods were applied to Hansard records (1812–2004). Method 1 prioritises portmanteau tags made up of USAS semtags. Method 2 prioritises themes derived from the HTOED. Method 3 draws on ‘meaning constellations’ (i.e. simultaneous searches of multiple tags). The UK parliamentary website highlights the “considerable ingenuity” displayed by MPs in order to circumvent their unparliamentary language prohibition. All methods have found examples of such ingenuity, many of which are characterized by multiple facework intentions (Archer 2015).

U2 - 10.1075/ijcl.22.1.02arc

DO - 10.1075/ijcl.22.1.02arc

M3 - Journal article

VL - 22

SP - 27

EP - 56

JO - International Journal of Corpus Linguistics

JF - International Journal of Corpus Linguistics

SN - 1384-6655

IS - 1

ER -