Email this article The multimodal representation of “Ideas worth spreading” through TED talks
Abstract
The slogan of TED talks reminds one of the overarching goals of this genre, i.e. to spread/share worthy ideas from different knowledge domains among the general public. The present contribution applies a multimodal perspective to the analysis of evaluation as a strategy used to shape such ideas in the talks. It actually takes into account a broad conception of evaluation as the expression of the speaker’s attitude or stance towards, viewpoint on, or feelings about what is being talked about (Thompson, Hunston 2000), which, in this textual genre in particular, tends to be imbued with a strong desire to cause or evoke a similar experience in the audience. The study focuses on quantitative and qualitative data on subjective (emotional and axiological) adjectives, gestures and visuals (content of slides) combining in ever more complex multimodal ensembles from a selection of talks in three different domains, in order to gain a more comprehensive insight into tedsters’ representations of their views emerging from the interactions of such resources. In fact, the findings show that the latter contribute significantly to the shaping of the proposed ideas as something worth listening to (and, ideally, endorsing). Also, they appear to display varied combinations across knowledge domains, thus pointing towards domain variation as a possible constraining factor responsible for the diversification of the multimodal rhetoric associated with the genre.
References
Anesa P. 2018, The Popularization of Environmental Rights in TED Talks, in “Journal of Law, Literature and Culture” 12 [1], pp. 203-219.
Caliendo G. 2012, The popularisation of science in web-based genres, in Caliendo G. and Bongo G. (eds.), The Language of Popularisation: Theoretical and Descriptive Models, Peter Lang, Bern, pp. 101-132.
Caliendo G. and Compagnone A. 2014, Expressing epistemic stance in university lectures and TED talks: A contrastive corpus-based analysis, in “Lingue e Linguaggi” 11, pp. 105-122.
Carney N. 2014, Is there a place for instructed gesture in EFL?, in Sonda N. and Krause A. (eds.), JALT 2013 Conference Proceedings, JALT, Tokio, pp. 413-421.
Cienki A. 2008, Why study metaphor and gesture?, in Cienki A. and Müller C. (eds.), Metaphor and Gesture, John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia, pp. 5-26.
Compagnone A. 2014, Knowledge dissemination and environmentalism: Exploring the language of TED Talks, in Chiavetta E., Sciarrino S. and Williams C. (eds.), Popularisation and the media, Edipuglia, Bari, pp. 7-25.
D’Avanzo S. 2015, Speaker identity vs. speaker diversity: The case of TED talks corpus, in Balirano G. and Nisco M.C. (eds.), Languaging Diversity: Identities, Genres, Discourses, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle upon Tyne, pp. 279-296.
Dummett P., Stephenson H. and Lansford L. 2016, Keynote. National Geographic Learning, CENGAGE Learning.
http://www.eltkeynote.com/ (23.4.2016).
Felices Lago Á. 1997, The integration of the axiological classeme in an adjectival lexicon based on functional-lexematic principles, in Butler C.S., Connolly J.H., Gatward R.A. and Vismans R.M. (eds.), A Fund of Ideas: Recent Developments in Functional Grammar, IFOTT, Amsterdam, pp. 95-112.
Hyland K. 2005, Stance and engagement: A model of interaction in academic discourse, in “Discourse Studies” 6 [2], pp. 173-191.
Kendon A. 2004, Gesture: Visible Action as Utterance, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Kress G. 2010, Multimodality: A Social Semiotic Approach to Contemporary Communication, Taylor and Francis, London.
Laudisio A. 2013, Popularization in TED talks: A contrastive analysis on expertise asymmetry, paper presented at the CLAVIER 13 Conference Discourse in and through the media, Recontextualizing and reconceptualizing expert discourse, Modena, 6-8 November, 2013.
Lazaraton A. 2004, Gesture and speech in the vocabulary explanations of one ESL teacher: A microanalytic inquiry, in “Language Learning” 54 [1], pp. 79-117.
Ledin P. and Machin D. 2018, Multimodal Critical Discourse Analysis, in Flowerdew J. and Richardson J. E. (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Critical Discourse Studies, Routledge, New York, pp. 60-76.
Lemke J. 1998, Multiplying meaning: Visual and verbal semiotics in scientific text, in Martin J.R. and Veel R. (eds.), Reading science, Routledge, London, pp. 87-113.
Masi S. 2016, Gestures in Motion in Ted Talks: Towards Multimodal Literacy, in Bonsignori V. and Crawford Camiciottoli B. (eds.), Multimodality across Communicative Settings, Discourse Domains and Genres, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle upon Tyne, pp.146-165.
Masi S. 2018, Exploring meaning making practices via co-speech gestures in TED Talks, paper presented at the 28 ESFL Conference, University of Pavia, 5-7 July 2018.
Masi S. 2019, Complex mapping of words and gestures in TED Talks, in Bonsignori V., Cappelli G. and Mattiello E. (eds.), Worlds of Words: Complexity, Creativity, and Conventionality in English Language, Literature and Culture, Pisa University Press, Pisa, pp. 115-126.
Mattiello E. 2017, The popularisation of science via TED Talks, in “International Journal of Language Studies” 11 [4], pp. 69-98.
Mattiello E. 2019, A corpus-based analysis of scientific TED Talks: Explaining cancer-related topics to non-experts, in “Discourse, Context & Media” 28, pp. 60-68.
McGregor A., Zielinski B., Meyers C. and Reed M. 2016, An exploration of teaching intonation using a TED Talk, in Levis J., Le H., Lucic I., Simpson E. and Vo S. (eds.), Proceedings of the 7th Pronunciation in Second Language Learning and Teaching Conference, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, pp. 143-159.
McNeill D. 1992, Hand and Mind: What the Hands Reveal about Thought, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Meza R. and Trofin C. 2015, Between Science Popularization and Motivational Infotainment: Visual Production, Discursive Patterns and Viewer Perception of TED Talks Videos, in “Studia Universitatis. Babes-Bolyai – Ephemerides” 60 [2], pp. 41-60.
Rasulo M. 2015, TED culture and ideas worth spreading, in Balirano G. and Nisco M.C. (eds.), Languaging diversity: Identities, genres, discourses, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle upon Tyne, pp. 262-278.
Rowley-Jolivet E. 2002, Visual discourse in scientific conference papers. A genre-based Study, in “English for specific purposes” 21 [1], pp. 19-40.
Scotto di Carlo G. 2012, Figurative language in science popularisation: Similes as an explanatory strategy in TED Talks, in “The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies”, 20 [3], pp. 1-16.
Scotto di Carlo G. 2013, Humour in popularisation: Analysis of humour-related laughter in TED talks, in “European Journal of Humour Research”, 1 [4], pp. 81-93.
Scotto di Carlo G. 2014a, The role of proximity in online popularizations: The case of TED Talks, in “Discourse Studies” 16 [5], pp. 591-606.
Scotto di Carlo G. 2014b, Ethos in TED Talks: The role of credibility in popularised texts, in “Facta Universitatis – Linguistics and Literature” 2, pp. 81-91.
Scotto di Carlo G. 2014c, New trends in knowledge dissemination: TED Talks, in “Acta Scientiarium. Language and Culture” 36 [2], pp. 121-130.
Scotto di Carlo G. 2015, Stance in TED talks: Strategic use of subjective adjectives in online popularization, in “Ibérica” 29, pp. 201-222.
Servinis E. 2013, Making the most of the TED talks in the EAP classroom, in “Contact” 39 [3], pp. 54-56.
Sketch Engine 2003. http://www.scketchengine.eu (6.11.2018).
Takaesu A. 2013, TED Talks as an extensive listening resource for EAP students, in “Language Education in Asia” 4 [2], pp. 150-162.
Thompson G. and Hunston S. 2000, Evaluation: An introduction, in Hunston S. and Thompson G. (eds.), Evaluation in Text. Authorial Stance and the Construction of Discourse, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp. 1-27.
Valeiras Jurado J. 2017, A Multimodal Approach to Persuasion in Oral Presentations. The case of conference presentations, research dissemination talks and product pitches, unpublished PhD Dissertation, Universitat Jaume I/Ghent University.
Valeiras Jurado J. and Caliendo G. 2018, Legitimation in academic TED talks: A multimodal analysis, paper presented at the Association for Business Communication (ABCSpain 2018), Universidad de Alcalá, Madrid, 11-13 July 2018.
TED Ideas worth spreading. http://www.ted.com (1.10.2018).
TED-Ed. https://ed.ted.com (8.10.2018).
Theunissen G. 2014, Analysis of the visual channel of communication in a corpus of TED Talks presentations. http://lib.ugent.be/en/catalog/rug01:002162185 (15.12.2018).
Tseronis A. and Forceville C. 2017, Multimodal Argumentation and Rhetoric in Media Genres, John Benjamins, Amsterdam/Philadelphia.
Wingrove P. 2017, How suitable are TED talks for academic listening?, in “Journal of English for Academic Purposes” 30, pp. 79-95.
Full Text: pdf
Refbacks
- There are currently no refbacks.
