(Luận văn) an attitudinal study on 2020 us presidential debates

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING QUY NHON UNIVERSITY LÊ THỊ MỸ HUỆ lu an n va AN ATTITUDINAL STUDY ON 2020 US ie gh tn to PRESIDENTIAL DEBATES p Field: English Linguistics w d oa nl Code: 8220201 u nf va an lu ll Supervisor: VÕ DUY ĐỨC, Ph.D oi m z at nh z m co l gm @ an Lu BINH DINH, 2021 n va ac th si BỘ GIÁO DỤC VÀ ĐÀO TẠO TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC QUY NHƠN LÊ THỊ MỸ HUỆ lu an n va NGUYÊN CỨU YẾU TỐ THÁI ĐỘ TRONG p ie gh tn to TRANH LUẬN TỔNG THỐNG HOA KỲ NĂM 2020 w oa nl Chuyên ngành: Ngôn Ngữ Anh d Mã số: 8220201 u nf va an lu ll Người hướng dẫn: TS VÕ DUY ĐỨC oi m z at nh z m co l gm @ an Lu BÌNH ĐỊNH, 2021 n va ac th si i STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP I hereby declare that I am the sole author of the thesis “An Attitudinal study on 2020 US Presidential Debates” I have not used any sources other than those listed in the bibliography and identified as references I further declare that this thesis has not been submitted for the award of any other degree or diploma in any university or other institution lu an n va tn to p ie gh Quy Nhơn, September 2021 oa nl w d Lê Thị Mỹ Huệ ll u nf va an lu oi m z at nh z m co l gm @ an Lu n va ac th si ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Without the help and support of many people, I would not have been able to complete this research I would like to express my sincere gratitude and respect to all of them First and foremost, I want to express my thanks to the most significant person in my life, Dr Vo Duy Duc, my supervisor, for his professional guidance and consistent encouragement I am grateful for his willingness to lu be my supervisor in his field of expertise, Appraisal Theory Thanks to his an n va materials, his hearted guidance from the very first day of my journey to the tn to last chapter of this thesis, his detailed feedbacks on every piece of my paper, my thesis was finally successfully accomplished p ie gh My special thanks also go to all the lecturers who have given me w knowledge during the last two years of my study oa nl Finally, my heartfelt appreciation goes to my close friends and my d family who are always beside me and give me spiritual support in studying ll u nf va an lu oi m z at nh z m co l gm @ an Lu n va ac th si iii ABSTRACT The study attempts to investigate the use of Attitudinal resources, including Affect, Judgement and Appreciation in the first US presidential debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden with the employment of the Appraisal Theory by Martin and White (2005) It was carried out through mixed approaches - quantitative and qualitative Attitudinal studies based on Appraisal theory has gained much attention from many researchers at home lu and abroad; however, it has been found that there is no related research on the an n va field of debate The examination shows that both Donald Trump and Joe tn to Biden employed Attitudinal resources in debate It was found that the candidates tend to use more Affect resources in their debate than the other gh p ie two Attitudinal categories, Appreciation and Judgement Although the two w candidates have a similar tendency in Attitudinal resources, they are different oa nl in the distribution of Attitude sub-types The study gives implications for d teaching and learning English and constitutes a base for further exploration of lu ll u nf va an evaluative language in the field of debates oi m z at nh z m co l gm @ an Lu n va ac th si iv TABLE OF CONTENTS STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii ABSTRACT iii TABLE CONTENT iv LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS vii LIST OF TABLES viii lu an LIST OF FIGURES ix n va LIST OF CHARTS x tn to CHAPTER INTRODUCTION gh 1.1.RATIONALE p ie 1.2 AIMS AND OBJECTIVES w 1.2.1 Aims oa nl 1.2.2 Objectives d 1.3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS lu va an 1.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY 1.5 SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY u nf ll 1.6 ORGANIZATION OF THE STUDY m oi 1.7 SUMMARY z at nh CHAPTER LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 THEORETICAL BACKGROUND z gm @ 2.1.1 Appraisal theory 2.1.2 Attitude l m co 2.1.3 Engagement 23 2.1.4 Graduation 25 an Lu 2.2 LITERATURE REVIEW 27 n va ac th si v 2.3 SUMMARY 29 CHAPTER RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES 30 3.1 RESEARCH METHODS 30 3.2 DATA COLLECTION 30 3.3 DATA ANALYSIS 31 3.4 RESEARCH PROCEDURES 31 3.5 Reliability and Validity in the research 32 3.6 SUMMARY 32 lu CHAPTER FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 32 an 4.1 GENERAL FEATURES OF THE FIST DEBATE OF DONALD va n TRUMP AND JOE BIDEN 33 4.2.1 Dis/Inclination 36 4.2.2 Un/Happiness 40 p ie gh tn to 4.2 Affect 35 nl w 4.2.3 Dis/Satisfaction 42 d oa 4.2.4 In/Security 43 an lu 4.3 JUDGEMENT 45 va 4.3.1 Social Esteem 47 ll u nf 4.3.2 Social Sanction 50 oi m 4.3.3 Explicit and Implicit Judgement in the first debate 53 z at nh 4.4 APPRECIATION 56 4.4.1 Reaction 57 z 4.4.2 Composition 60 @ gm 4.4.3 Valuation 61 m co l 4.4.4 Positive and Negative Appreciation in Donald Trump and Joe Biden 63 an Lu 4.5 SUMMARY 66 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS 67 n va ac th si vi 5.1 CONCLUSIONS 67 5.2 IMPLICATIONS 68 5.3 LIMITATIONS 69 5.4 SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH 69 REFERENCES 70 APPENDIX lu an n va p ie gh tn to d oa nl w ll u nf va an lu oi m z at nh z m co l gm @ an Lu n va ac th si vii LIST OF TABLES Table 2.1 Irrealis affect (Martin and White, 2005, p.48) 12 Table 2.2 Affect – Un/happiness (Martin and White, 2005:49) 13 Table 2.3 Affect – In/security (Martin and White, 2005, p.50) 14 Table 2.4 Affect – Dis/satisfaction (Martin and White, 2005, p.51) 14 Table 2.5 Judgements of esteem and sanction (Martin and White, 2005:53) 16 Table 2.6 Types of appreciation (Martin and White, 2005:56) 20 Table 2.7 Sub-types of appreciation (Martin and White: 57) 22 lu an Table 2.8 Points of Differences Borders (Martin and White,2005, p.57-60) 22 va n Table 2.9 Clauses for Clearing Differences (Martin and White,2005,p.58-59) 23 tn to Table 4.1 ARs in Donald Trump‟s and Joe Biden‟s debate 34 ie gh Table 4.2 Sub-types of Judgment in between Donald Trump and Joe Biden 46 p Table 4.3 Explicit and Implicit Judgement resources in debate 54 d oa nl w ll u nf va an lu oi m z at nh z m co l gm @ an Lu n va ac th si viii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1 An overview of appraisal resources Figure 2.2 An Overview of Attitude (Martin and White, 2005) 10 Figure 2.3 Judgement and Appreciation as Institutionalised Affect Figure 2.4 Engagement Sub-categories (Martin & White, 2005) 25 11 lu an n va p ie gh tn to d oa nl w ll u nf va an lu oi m z at nh z m co l gm @ an Lu n va ac th si 60 (4.72)JB: (02:36) Yes Well, that’s what he’s going to try to do, but there’s thousands of scientists out there, like here at this great hospital that don’t work for him Their job doesn’t depend on him They’re the people… And by the way (4.73)DJ: (04:01) We really feel that We have a professor at Notre Dame, highly respected by all, said she’s the single greatest student he’s ever had He’s been a professor for a long time at a great school lu Moreover, from the analyzed data, it can be realized that Joe Biden an used positive reaction items to evaluate military, Supreme Court judges va n America, as can be seen in the examples below: ie gh tn to (4.74)JB: (01:09:30) And if there’s thousands of ballots, it’s going to take time to it p And by the way, our military… They’ve been voting by ballots since the end of nl w the Civil War, in effect And that’s what’s going to happen Why is it, for d oa them, somehow not fraudulent It’s the same process It’s honest an lu 4.4.2 Composition u nf va Another sub-type of Appreciation is Composition The composition may be evaluated through two items Balance and Complexity From the ll oi m analyzed data, it can be realized that both candidates employ the items of z at nh complexity Most of them are negative ones used to evaluate the political campaigns in the debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden This is shown l gm @ (4.75) DJ: (04:01) z in the examples below: m co .So I think that she will be outstanding She’s going to be as good as anybody that has served on that court We really feel that We have a an Lu professor at Notre Dame, highly respected by all, said she’s the single n va ac th si 61 greatest student he’s ever had He’s been a professor for a long time at a great school (4.76) DJ: (28:45) .I’m doing better than any Republican has done in a long time, because they saw what you did (4.77) JB: (13:25) They’ve done nothing to help small businesses Nothing They’re closing One in six is now gone He ought to get on the job and take care of lu the needs of the American people so we can open safely an Like Affect and Judgement, things can be appreciated positively or va n negatively In the above examples, both candidates Donald Trump and Joe gh tn to Biden employ negative words to evaluate the political, businesses such as p ie long, and small However, they did so not to criticize this activity but to show their understanding attitude towards American citizens oa nl w 4.4.3 Valuation From the data investigated, it can be seen that Valuation resources d an lu frequently occur in the two corpora of debate In the debate between Donald u nf va Trump and Joe Biden, Valuation dominates the highest percentage of Appreciation resources with 48% Meanwhile, Appreciation resources rank ll oi m second in the debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden z at nh Valuation is used to assess the quality of candidates and the significance they bring to citizens America This can be seen clearly by z gm @ examining the lexical items (extremely good, hard, great) both candidates use in the debate, which might help Americans decide whom to vote for and and l (4.78) DJ: (15:24) m co have confidence in the future, as can be seen in the example below: an Lu You’ll see it as soon as it’s finished, you’ll see it You know, if you n va ac th si 62 wanted to, go to the Board of Elections There’s 118 page or so report that says everything I have, every bank I have, I’m totally under leveraged because the assets are extremely good (4.79) JB: (23:59) Well, it’s hard to get any word in with this clown Excuse me, this person (4.80) JB: (02:36) Yes Well, that’s what he’s going to try to do, but there’s thousands of lu scientists out there, like here at this great hospital that don’t work for him an Their job doesn’t depend on him They’re the people… And by the way va n Moreover, Valuation is used as a tool to assess the quality of a job This gh tn to can be seen in Donald Jump‟s use of the word „phenomenal‟, whose p ie frequency of occurrence is found to be significant This highlights his accomplishments during his previous tenure in order to persuade Americans oa nl w to trust his leadership and vote for him if he wins this election (4.81) DJ: (22:07) d an lu You didn’t think we should have closed our country because you u nf va thought it was terrible You wouldn’t have closed it for another two months By my doing it early, in fact, Dr Fauci said, ―President Trump saved ll oi m thousands of lives.‖ Many of your Democrat Governors said, ―President z at nh Trump did a phenomenal job.‖ We worked with the Governor Oh really, go take a look The Governors said I did a phenomenal job Most of them said z @ that In fact, people that would not be necessarily on my side said that, m co the masks We made the ventilators l gm ―President Trump did a phenomenal job.‖ We did We got the gowns We got The thing that both candidates evaluated in their debate is the value of an Lu the work when the plague came in and have an impact on the economy as n va ac th si 63 well as citizen safety as can be seen in the examples below: (4.82) DT: (09:52) So we built the greatest economy in history We closed it down because of the China plague When the plague came in, we closed it down, which was very hard psychologically to He didn’t think we should close it down and he was wronG Again, two million people would be dead now instead of… Still, 204,000 people is too much One person is too much Should have never happened from China But what happened is we closed it down and now lu (4.83) JB: (57:10) an … we’re going to be in a position where we can create hard, hard, va n good jobs by making sure the environment is clean, and we all are in better tn to shape We spend billions of dollars now, billions of dollars, on floods, ie gh hurricanes, rising seas We’re in real trouble Look what’s happened just in p the Midwest with these storms that come through and wipe out entire sections nl w and counties in Iowa They didn’t happen before They’re because of global d oa warming We make up 15% of the world’s problem But the rest of the world, va Paris Accord an lu we’ve got to get them to come along That’s why we have to get back into the ll u nf From the examples above, it can be realized that the two candidates oi m employ all positive items of valuation to talk about the work performed by z at nh their colleagues and their supporters By doing so, they want to show their appreciation as well as their gratitude towards these people z 4.4.4 Positive and Negative Appreciation in Donald Trump and gm @ Joe Biden m co l Similar to Affect and Judgement, Appreciation also consists of positive and negative items The frequency of occurrences concerning positive and is illustrated in Chart 4.7 an Lu negative Appreciation in the first date between Donald Trump and Joe Biden n va ac th si 64 lu an n va Chart 4.7 Positive and Negative Appreciation resources in Donald Trump and Joe Biden tn to gh It can be seen from the chart above that positive appreciation resources p ie in the two candidates‟ debate outnumbers that of negative appreciation w resources This implied that both candidates want Americans to realize that oa nl things have been done well so far and that Americans should believe in a d good picture of America in the future lu va an Therefore, the candidates in the first debate tried their best to satisfy ll (4.84) DJ: (15:59) u nf their citizens in the United States This is exemplified as follows: m oi they’ll probably blame him, but they’ll blame me But more z at nh importantly (+Appreciation, Reaction, I want to help people Okay I said, ―You’ve got to run it so well.‖ And I just had a meeting with them They said z m co (4.85) JB: (14:12) l too expensive gm @ the problem is, no matter how well you run Obamacare, it’s a disaster It’s (4.86)DJ: (22:54) an Lu I’m here standing facing you, old (-Appreciation, Reaction) buddy n va ac th si 65 The only thing I haven’t done a good job, and that’s because of the fake (-Appreciation, Valuation) news, no matter what you say to them, they give you a bad press on it It’s just fake (-Appreciation, Valuation) news They give you good (+Appreciation, Valuation) press, they give me bad (-Appreciation, Valuation) press because that’s the way it is, unfortunately (4.87)DJ: (05:08) Well, he wants to shut down this country and I want to keep it open, lu and we did a great(+Appreciation, Reaction) thing by shutting it down an (4.88)DJ: (01:02:35) va n This is going to be a fraud like you’ve never seen The other thing, gh tn to it’s nice(+Appreciation, Reaction) On November 3rd, you’re watching, and ie you see who won the election And I think we’re going to well because p people are really happy with the job we’ve done oa nl w From the above examples, it can be realized that Donald Trump used the word negative such as "fake" He praised his administration's response to d an lu the coronavirus, claiming that the press was trying to undermine him "It's just u nf va fake news They give you good press and give me bad press," Mr Trump said, referring to Biden "I'll tell you, Joe, you could've never done the job that we ll oi m did." z at nh The positive and negative Appreciation resources used by Donald Trump and Joe Biden in the debate arguably affect the attitudes of American z gm @ citizens in particular and those who follow the debate around the world in general By the use of the positive resources, the two candidates possibly l m co want to make every US citizen aware of the development in all aspects from economics to social issues On the other hand, the negative values are used to an Lu clearly show the difficulties the United States is facing, from which Donald n va ac th si 66 Trump and Joe Biden offer the most optimal ideas and solutions In summary, the data analysis shows that of the three sub-types of the Attitudinal system, Affect resources are extensively employed in the debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden It ranks second in the Attitudinal system This means that candidates tend to assess the impact, then behavioural aspects more frequently It is also found that positive items outnumber negative ones This reveals that most candidates attempt to please citizens; moreover, Donald Trump and Joe Biden focus on positively lu evaluating what they experienced or what they go through and what they an accomplish to increase citizen trust va n 4.5 SUMMARY to gh tn In summary, this chapter has presented the findings and discussions of p ie Attitudinal values employed in the first debate of Donald Trump and Joe Biden The results show that all three types of Attitude exist in the two oa nl w candidates‟ debate, and most are positive However, there is a remarkable difference in the percentage of three kinds of Attitudinal resources employed d an lu in each type of debate In the two candidates debate, Affectual resources u nf va account for the most significant proportion Appreciation resources rank second, and Judgement resources account for the most minor proportion This ll oi m suggests that the candidates were fierce in their rhetoric and took their time to z at nh corner each other through personal and family matters Hence, they got emotional and often aggressively responded to each other‟s accusations z @ While President Trump sounded louder and more confident as he gazed on his l gm opponent, Biden‟s tone was calmer but rebuking as he mostly spoke directly, m co looking at the camera or the moderator For more details, the satisfactory conclusion of the findings is introduced in the next chapter an Lu n va ac th si 67 CHAPTER CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS The purpose of this chapter is to bring the thesis to a finish The paper first derives critical inferences from the findings, then provides pertinent implications, and lastly examines the current study's limitations and gives some ideas for future research based on the collected and evaluated data 5.1 CONCLUSIONS An appraisal is divided into three domains, and one of them is Attitude which contains three kinds, namely Affect, Judgment, and Appreciation Each lu an sub-system of Attitude is then sub-classified into many interrelated sets of va Appraisal values It can be seen from the findings that all of the importance of n tn to Attitude was found in the first 2020 US Presidential debate ie gh In general, there were more similarities than dissimilarities discovered p in the research Although there were still some discrepancies, yet they were oa nl w not significant First of all, in terms of Affect, the finding concluded that most of the d an lu sub-types of Affect were discovered in the debate by Donald Trump and Joe u nf va Biden Interestingly, the Affect resources utilized in the first debate display the same ranking pattern of frequency, from the highest to the lowest, as ll oi m follows: Dis/Inclination, Dis/Satisfaction, Un/Happiness/ In/Security In the z at nh discussion between Donald Trump and Joe Biden, they expressed their desire and commitment to things that would happen in the future, which led to the z gm @ realization that the majority of resources were positive, while negative resources were much less As a result, those Affect resources were primarily m co l used to desire the candidates' feelings As regards Judgment, the resources of this value were found not to be an Lu widespread as the others Generally, Donald Trump and Joe Biden view the n va ac th si 68 issues markedly positively Positive comments, it is apparent, can boost selfconfidence and elevate each candidate's position in conveying political understanding and bringing incredible things to residents and the United States Additionally, the findings indicate that Donald Trump and Joe Biden tend to evaluate human behaviour explicitly via lexical items containing Judgement values To successfully reach that goal, Explicit Judgments were preferable to Implicit to directly transfer the meaning to audiences and citizens and limit the misunderstanding lu Concerning Appreciation, in the first debate by Donald Trump and Joe an n va Biden, Valuation ranked first, followed by Reaction, and Composition took tn to up the lowest position For this sub-system of Attitude, the findings show that Donald Trump and Joe Biden are similar in that positive Appreciation is more gh p ie than negative The Appreciation resources were preferable to Judgment, w which led to the simple Appreciations feature, catching the citizens' high oa nl interest The Appreciation resources were made concrete by applying the d lexical means shared by Donald Trump and Joe Biden, such as the best/ great/ va an lu nice, and so on u nf 5.2 IMPLICATIONS ll By drawing on Appraisal Theory, the analysis of the attitudinal m oi resources in the debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden may be of z at nh paramount significance and importance to learners of English in terms of z orientation in language study and practice @ gm The study will offer language learners an excellent insight to get m co l involved in the evaluation and using the evaluative linguistic resources In other words, this thesis helps learners enrich their knowledge of attitudinal an Lu resources to express judgements and attitudes toward issues or events in n va ac th si 69 comment sections in general and debate ones in particular Additionally, this study is practical for English learners because they can apply the language of evaluation for both classroom academic language and English for daily communication purposes, which is helpful to produce an exciting and vivid conversation In short, teachers and learners of language can use the findings in this thesis in their teaching, learning and using linguistics to express assessments with an argumentative and informative attitude 5.3 LIMITATIONS lu an Throughout the research process, the researcher is acutely aware of the n va limits of the study An appraisal is the language of evaluation It involves tn to three main sub-systems that operate simultaneously: Attitude, Engagement, gh and Graduation, a full description of all of them could not be done Once p ie having identified such limitations above, the researcher hopes to continue w working on those issues, or at least, to approach further studies conducted by oa nl other researchers d 5.4 SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH an lu va During the procedure of the study, the researcher is deeply conscious of ll u nf the limitations of this research An appraisal is the language of evaluation, oi m involving three simultaneous focal sub-systems: Attitude, Engagement and z at nh Graduation Within the limit of the M.A thesis, a full description of all of them could not be done Therefore, there remain certain appealing areas that z can be developed for further research and studies, as followed: @ l gm Graduation resources in the debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden m co Engagement resources in the debate between Donald Trump and Joe Biden an Lu n va ac th si 70 REFERENCES Altikriti, S (2016) Persuasive Speech Acts in Barack Obama’s Inaugural Speeches (2009, 2013) and The Last State of the Union Address (2016), International Journal of Linguistics, 8(2), 48 Bell, A (1991) The language of news media Oxford: Blackwell Bhatia, K V (2004) Worlds of written discourse London: Continuum Do Huynh My Lien (2015) A comparative study of interpersonal meaning lu an realized through Attitude values in showbiz news in English and n va Vietnamese online newspapers M.A thesis, Quynhon tn to Eggins, S (2004) Introduction to systemic functional linguistics (2nd ed.) ie gh London: Bloomsbury Publishing p Halliday, M.A.K (1994) An Introduction to Functional Grammar London: nl w Edward Arnold d oa Halliday, M A K., & Matthiessen, c (2004) An introduction to functional an lu grammar (3rd ed.) London: Edward Arnold u nf va Hood, S (2004) Appraisal research: taking a stance in academic writing Ph.D Thesis Sydney: University of technology ll m oi Hood, S., Forey, G (2005) Introducing a conference paper: Getting z at nh interpersonal with your audience Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4, 291–306 z gm @ Iedema, R., Feez, S., & White, P R R (1994) Media Literacy (Write it right m co East Disadvantaged School Program l literacy in industrial research project - Stage 2) Sydney: Metropolitan an Lu Liu, L., & Stevenson, M (2013) A cross-cultural analysis of stance in disaster news reports Australian Review of Applied Linguistics, 36(2), n va ac th si 71 Liu, X (2013) Evaluation in Chinese University EFL Students‟ English Argumentative Writing : An APPRAISAL Study, Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 10( 1) Liu, X, & Thompson, P (2009) Attitude in students‟ argumentative writing contrastive perspective Language studies working papers Martin, J.R., & Rose, D (2007) Working with discourse : Meaning beyond the clause (2nd ed.) London : Continuum Martin, J.R (1992) English text: System and Structure Amsterdam: lu an Benjamins va n Martin, J R (1996) Types of stuctures: deconstructing notions of tn to constituency in clause and text In E H Hovy & D R Scott (Eds.), p ie gh Computational and conversational discourse: Burning issues- an interdisciplinary account (pp 39-66) Heidelberg: Springer nl w Martin, J R (2000) Close reading: functional linguistics as a tool for critical d oa discourse analysis In L Unsworth (Ed.), Research language in an lu schools and communities: functional linguistic perspectives (pp 275- u nf va 302) London: Cassell Martin, J R., & Rose, D (2003) Working with discourse: meaning beyond ll oi m the clause LonDon: Continuum z at nh Martin, J R., & David Rose (2003) Working with Discourse—meaning beyond the clause London: Continuum z gm @ Martin, J R & White, P R R (2005) The Language of Evaluation: l Appraisal in English New York: Palgrave Macmillan m co Nguyen, T.T.H (2014) A Comparative Study of Interpersonal Meaning in Approach, M.A Thesis, Quy Nhon University an Lu Hotel Brochures Written in English and Vietnamese- Appraisal n va ac th si 72 Nguyen, T.T.H et al (2014) The use of Expansion resources in the English and Vietnamese political editorials about North Korea in the light of Appraisal theory, Science Journal at HCMC University of Education in 2014 No.60 Nguyen, T.T.H (2016a) An Appraisal Study of Social Attitudes in News Reports towards President Obama' s Visit to Vietnam, VNU Journal of Science: Foreign Studies, Vol 32, No.4, 21-29 Nguyen Thi Thu Hien (2016) An Appraisal Study of Social Attitudes in News lu an Reports towards President Obama's Visit to Vietnam VNU Journal of n va Science: Foreign Studies, 32(4), 21-29 tn to Ngo, T, & Unsworth, I (2015) Reworking the appraisal framework in ESL ie gh research: refining attitude resources Functional Linguistics, 2(1) p Pascual, N., & Unger, L (2010) Appraisal in the research genres: An nl w analysis of grant proposals by Argentinean researchers Revista d oa Signos, 43(73), 261-280 u nf va Case Study an lu Taiwo, R (2009) Legitimization and Coercion in Political Discourse: A Tran Thi Thuy Tien (2017) A Study on the Attitudinal Resorerces in Donald ll oi m Trump and Hillary Clinton's Speeches in the US Presidential Election z at nh 2016, Unpublished Master's Thesis Quy Nhon Uiversity Vo Duy Duc (2011) Styłe, structure and ideology in English and Vietnamese z The University of Adelaide, gm @ business hard news reporting: a comparative study (Doctoral thesis), Australia from m co l http://hdl.handle net:2440/71002 Retrieved into Langunges and Cultures, 1(1), 13-24 an Lu Vo Duy Duc (2017) Appraisal – an approach to discourse analysis: Inquiry n va ac th si 73 Vo Thi Ngoc Hien.(2014) Attitude in Victory Speeches of Barack Obama and George Walker Bush , Unpublished Master's Thesis Quy Nhon Uiversity Wang Zhenhua, 2004 Study of Attitude in Hard News, Foreign Language Education, Vol.25, No.5, 31-36 White, P (2001) An introductory tour through Appraisal theory (word processor version) http://www.grammatics.com/appraisal (accessed 08/29/12) lu an White, P R R (2004) Subjectivity, evaluation and point of view in media n va discourse In C Coffin, A Hewings & K O'Halloran (Eds.), Applying ie gh tn to English Grammar London: Hodder Arnold p WEBSITE oa nl w https://www.aa.com.tr/en/analysis/analysis-first-round-of-biden-vs-trump-aninconclusive- d an lu debate/1997237?fbclid=IwAR0lAwhmNlpgbwEJqx9JIQ7LgVzjMoY u nf va aGwGqD0JaDTkAR6_aAZWmyv_U10Y ll https://www.c-span.org/debates/?debate=first m oi https://theconversation.com/the-first-us-presidential-debate-was-pure-chaos- z at nh heres-what-our-experts-thought-147178 z https://www.academia.edu/9949580/The_Language_of_Evaluation_Appraisal m co l gm @ _in_English an Lu n va ac th si APPENDIX https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wW1lY5jFNcQ https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-joe-biden-1stpresidential-debate-transcript-2020 lu an n va p ie gh tn to d oa nl w ll u nf va an lu oi m z at nh z m co l gm @ an Lu n va ac th si