IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/sagope/v14y2024i4p21582440241284374.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unpacking Evaluative Meaning-Making Resources in Verbal Movie Descriptions: A Comparative Study of Native and Non-Native English Speakers

Author

Listed:
  • Muhammed Parviz
  • Alireza Jalilifar
  • Alexanne Don

Abstract

The present study explored how native speakers (NSs) and non-native speakers (NNSs) of English exploit evaluative meaning-making resources of English when sharing their judgements and opinions on English movie descriptions. To this end, 10 native speakers of Australian English and 10 Iranian non-native speakers took part in on-line informal interviews, based on an approach known as snowball sampling. The study employed a combination of both qualitative and quantitative methods of analysis. The results revealed significant differences in the use of evaluative language between the two groups, with NNSs focusing more on Affect, Judgment and Appreciation respectively, while NSs prioritized Appreciation, followed by Affect and Judgment. The findings are discussed by reference to cultural and linguistic differences in the use of evaluative resources. Moreover, NSs relied more on invoked evaluation whereas NNSs showed a preference for inscribed evaluation. However, both groups utilized a higher frequency of positive descriptions in during their descriptions of English movies. These findings can provide valuable insights for language teaching and research, highlighting the significance of incorporating evaluative language resources into language instruction. The study further brought attention to the interconnectedness of diverse evaluative resources such as reference to emotions and judgements with complex linguistic and cultural domains.

Suggested Citation

  • Muhammed Parviz & Alireza Jalilifar & Alexanne Don, 2024. "Unpacking Evaluative Meaning-Making Resources in Verbal Movie Descriptions: A Comparative Study of Native and Non-Native English Speakers," SAGE Open, , vol. 14(4), pages 21582440241, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:14:y:2024:i:4:p:21582440241284374
    DOI: 10.1177/21582440241284374
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/21582440241284374
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/21582440241284374?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:sagope:v:14:y:2024:i:4:p:21582440241284374. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.