Attitudinal Analysis of Business Executive’s Public Speeches in English and Central Kurdish: A Comparative Study

Hawsar A. Shekhani; Daban Q. Jaff

doi:10.25212/lfu.qzj.9.1.38

توێژەران

Hawsar A. Shekhani Koya Physical Education Insinuation, Ministry of Education, Koya KOY45, Kurdistan Region, Iraq
Daban Q. Jaff Department of English Language, Faculty of Education, Koya University, Koya KOY45, Kurdistan Region, Iraq

##semicolon##

https://doi.org/10.25212/lfu.qzj.9.1.38

##semicolon##

Interpersonal Meta-function, Appraisal, Attitude, Appreciation, Judgment, Business Executives Discourse

پوختە

This research compares business communication in English and Central-Kurdish from the perspective of the Attitudinal mode in Interpersonal language meta-function. Researchers use content analysis, a descriptive and qualitative method, to examine public speeches given by business executives. This research tool is a qualitative exploratory analysis of English and Central-Kurdish business executives' public statements. The following are the questions that are addressed in the paper: What is the dominant attitudinal mood type among the business executives in English and Central-Kurdish? How does the selection of the attitudinal mood by business executives in English and Central-Kurdish impact the interpersonal meta-function? and lastly, what are the frequency of Polarities of Attitudinal choices in the public speeches of business executives? The findings show the information about the distribution of the results in regard to the attitude types, the use and selection of the attitudinal subcategories and the frequencies of each attitudinal mode in business executive’s public speeches in English and Central-Kurdish quantitatively. The results of the study shows that the most selected choice of attitude is affect in English, Whereas in Central-Kurdish Judgment is predominantly selected, besides the use of the attitudinal subcategories significantly affect the interpersonal meaning through which the speaker expresses his attitude, and influencing friendship and intimacy with the audience. The prominent attitudinal polarity is positive in the English language. Conversely, in Central-Kurdish negative polarity is mostly used by the Central-Kurdish business executive.

##plugins.generic.usageStats.downloads##

##plugins.generic.usageStats.noStats##

سەرچاوەکان

References;

-Banks, D. (2019). A systemic functional grammar of English: a simple introduction. New York, Ny: Routledge.

-Bargiela-Chiappini, F., Nickerson, C. and Planken, B. (2007). Business Discourse. London: Palgrave Macmillan: UK.

-Biber, D. (2006). University language : a corpus-based study of spoken and written registers. J. Benjamins.

-Friginal, E. (2009). The language of outsourced call centers : a corpus-based study of cross-cultural interaction. John Benjamins Pub. Co.

-Hadidi, Y., & Mohammadbagheri-Parvin, L. (2015). Systemic Functional Linguistics as Interpersonal Semantics: Appraisal and Attitude in the Stylistic Analysis of an English Novel. International Journal of Linguistics, 7(1), 129. https://doi.org/10.5296/ijl.v7i1.7199

-Halliday, M.A.K. and M, C. (1994). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Arnold ; New York.

-Hommerberg, C., & Don, A. (2015). Appraisal and the language of wine appreciation. Functions of Language, 22(2), 161–191. https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.22.2.01hom

-Hood, S. (2010). Appraising research : evaluation in academic writing. Palgrave Macmillan.

-Martin, J.R. and P R R White (2005). The Language of Evaluation: Appraisal in English. Basingstoke ; New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

-Ngo, T., & Unsworth, L. (2015). Reworking the appraisal framework in ESL research: refining attitude resources. Functional Linguistics, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40554-015-0013-x

-Shekhani, H.A., (Halliday's Interpersonal Meta-function Analysis of Entrepreneurs' Public Speeches in English and Central Kurdish: A Comparative Study) [Master's thesis, Charmo Univeristy].

-Thompson, G. (2014). Introducing Functional Grammar. London: Routledge.

-White, P. R. (2012). Attitudinal meanings, translational commensurability and linguistic relativity.