07.03.2013 Views

A Discussion of the Representation of Masculinity and Femininity in ...

A Discussion of the Representation of Masculinity and Femininity in ...

A Discussion of the Representation of Masculinity and Femininity in ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

consider what is excluded as well as <strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>in</strong> each representation. The frameworks<br />

devised by van Leeuwen (1995, 1996) are drawn on where possible to elucidate how<br />

Baden-Powell represents <strong>the</strong> Scouts <strong>and</strong> Brownies as social actors <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> activities or<br />

‘social actions’ <strong>of</strong> smil<strong>in</strong>g, be<strong>in</strong>g loyal <strong>and</strong> do<strong>in</strong>g a good turn. This is because “different<br />

ways <strong>of</strong> represent<strong>in</strong>g social action encode different <strong>in</strong>terpretations <strong>of</strong>, <strong>and</strong> attitudes to,<br />

<strong>the</strong> social actions represented” (van Leeuwen, 1995: 81). The frameworks have been<br />

described as “a sociological grammar” (1995: 82) <strong>and</strong> “a sociosemantic <strong>in</strong>ventory” (1996:<br />

32) respectively by van Leeuwen, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> focus (<strong>in</strong> l<strong>in</strong>e with CDA practice) follows <strong>the</strong><br />

assumption that “mean<strong>in</strong>g belongs to culture ra<strong>the</strong>r than to language” (van Leeuwen,<br />

1996: 32).<br />

The present study is especially concerned with van Leeuwen’s accounts <strong>of</strong><br />

exclusion, role allocation, descriptivization <strong>and</strong> distillation (which are briefly outl<strong>in</strong>ed<br />

below), <strong>and</strong> van Leeuwen <strong>and</strong> Wodak’s account <strong>of</strong> recontextualization. With<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

broader field <strong>of</strong> CDA, <strong>the</strong> study looks at pronouns <strong>and</strong> modality as l<strong>in</strong>guistic vehicles<br />

through which mean<strong>in</strong>g can be <strong>in</strong>terpreted from a critical perspective.<br />

‘Exclusion’ refers to <strong>in</strong>stances when social actors <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir activities are not<br />

<strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>in</strong> a particular text. This can be highly <strong>in</strong>terpretable if <strong>the</strong> same activity is be<strong>in</strong>g<br />

textually represented for two different readerships, such as is <strong>the</strong> case with <strong>the</strong> texts<br />

under study <strong>in</strong> this piece <strong>of</strong> research, where <strong>the</strong> activities are represented for <strong>the</strong> Scouts<br />

on <strong>the</strong> one h<strong>and</strong>, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> Brownies on <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r.<br />

‘Role allocation’ refers to <strong>the</strong> actual roles assigned to <strong>the</strong> social actors <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong><br />

representations, <strong>and</strong> draws particularly on Halliday’s transitivity work <strong>in</strong> order to<br />

categorise what type <strong>of</strong> role is given to whom.<br />

‘Descriptivization’ is <strong>the</strong> term van Leeuwen uses to describe <strong>in</strong>stances where <strong>the</strong><br />

actions or reactions <strong>of</strong> a social actor are represented as relatively permanent qualities or<br />

characteristics <strong>of</strong> that actor.<br />

Page 18

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!