Cover not available

Article published In: Language, Context and Text
Vol. 5:1 (2023) ► pp.124–160

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload EPUB
authorization required

A trinocular view of the auxiliary verb will in COVID-19 briefings from Westminster and Holyrood

ORCiD logo with link | Coventry University, United Kingdom
ORCiD logo with link | Coventry University, United Kingdom
Published online: 26 May 2023
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/langct.22011.bea
Abstract
This corpus assisted investigation of the auxiliary verb will examines the various modalities and functions realised in the register of political briefings given by Scottish (Holyrood) and United Kingdom (Westminster) representatives throughout the first year of the coronavirus pandemic.
A trinocular approach is taken to consider the lexicogrammatical environment of will (from around), the discourse semantics of will (from above) and the relationship between contraction and meaning (from below).
Our trinocular approach with a focus on will as a highly frequent item with great meaning potential has enabled us to gain insights about the nature of how politicians used modality to persuade, organise and empathise within coronavirus media briefings and thus shape their public personas as leaders.
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Review of previous research
    • 2.1Crisis communications, leadership and strategies of engagement
    • 2.2Will as a modal auxiliary
    • 2.3Personal pronouns preceding will
    • 2.4Research questions
  • 3.Data and methodology
    • 3.1Texts of briefings
    • 3.2Methodology
  • 4.Results: Lexicogrammatical features of will
    • 4.1Pronouns preceding will
    • 4.2Inclusive and exclusive We will
    • 4.3You will
    • 4.4I will
    • 4.5Summary
  • 5.Functions of will in discourse
    • 5.1Functions of we will in discourse
    • 5.2Functions of you will in discourse
    • 5.3Functions of I will in discourse
    • 5.4Summary
  • 6.The relationship between contraction and meaning
  • 7.Discussion
  • 8.Summary and conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
References (33)
References
Biber, Douglas. 1988. Variation across speech and writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
BNC Consortium. 2007. British National Corpus, XML version. Oxford Text Archive. [URL]
Boyd, Julian & James P. Thorne. 1969. The semantics of modal verbs. Journal of Linguistics 5(1). 57–74. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bull, Peter & Anita Fetzer. 2006. Who are we and who are you? The strategic use of forms of address in political interviews. Text & Talk 26(1). 3–37. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Coates, Jennifer. 1983. The semantics of the modal auxiliaries. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dückers, Michael L. A., C. Joris Yzermans, Wouter Jong & Arjen Boin. 2017. Psychosocial crisis management: The unexplored intersection of crisis leadership and psychosocial support. Risk, Hazards and Crisis in Public Policy 8(2). 94–112. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fairclough, Norman. 2003. Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. London & New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2013. Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language (2nd edition). London & New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fetzer, Anita & Peter Bull. 2008. The strategic use of pronouns in political interviews. Journal of Language and Politics 7(2). 271–289. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Finegan, Edward & Douglas Biber. 1986. Toward a unified model of sociolinguistic prestige. In David Sankoff (ed.), Diversity and diachrony, 391–397. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gigliotti, Ralph A. 2016. Leader as performer; leader as human: A discursive and retrospective construction of crisis leadership. Atlantic Journal of Communication 24(4). 185–200. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. 2002 [1996]. On grammar and grammatics. In M. A. K. Halliday, On grammar, volume 1 in the collected works of M.A.K. Halliday, 384–417. Edited by Jonathan J. Webster. London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
2007 [1996]. Literacy and linguistics: A functional perspective. In Michael A. K. Halliday, Language education, volume 9 in the collected works of M.A.K. Halliday, 97–129. Edited by Jonathan J. Webster. London: Bloomsbury Academic.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Halliday, M. A. K. with Christian M. I. M. Matthiessen. 2014. Halliday’s introduction to functional grammar (4th edition). London and New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Haslam, Alexander S., Niklas K. Steffens, Stephen D. Reicher & Sarah V. Bentley. 2021. Identity leadership in a crisis: A 5R framework for learning from responses to COVID-19. Social Issues and Policy Review 15(1). 35–83. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huddleston, Rodney. 1995. The case against a future tense in English. Studies in Language 19(2). 399–446. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hunt, Sally. 2021. COVID and the South African family: Cyril Ramaphosa, president or father? Discourse, Context and Media 441. 100541. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jaworska, Sylwia. 2021. Competence and collectivity: The discourse of Angela Merkel’s media communications during the first wave of the pandemic. Discourse, Context and Media 421. 100506. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kennedy, Graeme. 2002. Variation in the distribution of modal verbs in the British National Corpus. In Randi Reppen, Douglas Biber & Susan Fitzmaurice (eds.), Using corpora to explore linguistic variation, 73–90. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kilgarriff, Adam, Vít Baisa, Jan Bušta, Miloš Jakubícek, Vojtěch Kovár, Jan Michelfeit, Pavel Rychlý, & Vít Suchomel. 2014. The sketch engine: Ten years on. Lexicography 1(1). 7–36. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Maercker, Andreas & Julia Müller. 2004. Social acknowledgment as a victim or survivor: A scale to measure a recovery factor of PTSD. Journal of Traumatic Stress 17(4). 345–351. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Martin, J. R. 2019. Discourse semantics. In Geoff Thompson, Wendy L. Bowcher, Lise Fontaine & David Schönthal (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of systemic functional linguistics, 358–381. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Matthiessen, Christian M. I. M. 1995. Lexicogrammatical cartography: English systems. Tokyo: International Language Sciences Publishers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Montiel, Christine J., Joshua Uyheng & Erwine Dela Paz. 2021. The language of pandemic leaderships: Mapping political rhetoric during the COVID-19 outbreak. Political Psychology 42(5). 747–766. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Palmer, Frank R. 2014. Modality and the English modals (2nd edition). Abingdon & New York: Routledge. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Proctor, Katarzyna I. & Lily I-Wen Su. 2011. The 1st person plural in political discourse – American politicians in interviews and in a debate. Journal of Pragmatics 43(13). 3251–3266. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pyykkö, Riitta. 2002. Who is “us” in Russian political discourse? In Anna Duszak (ed.), Us and others: Social identities across languages, discourses and cultures, 233–248. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Quaglio, Paulo & Douglas Biber. 2006. The grammar of conversation. In Bas Aarts & April McMahon (eds.), The handbook of English linguistics, 692–723. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Raphael, Beverley. 1986. When disaster strikes: A handbook for the caring professions. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sarkar, Anoop. 1998. The conflict between future tense and modality: The case of will in English. University of Pennsylvania working papers in linguistics 5(2). 91–117. Available at: [URL]
Williams, Jamie & David Wright. 2022. Ambiguity, responsibility and political action in the UK daily COVID-19 briefings. Critical Discourse Studies, 1–16. (19 August, 2022) Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yzermans, Joris & Berthold P. R. Gersons. 2002. The chaotic aftermath of an airplane crash in Amsterdam: A second disaster. In Johan M. Havenaar, Julie Cwikel & Evelyn J. Bromet (eds.), Toxic turmoil: Psychological and societal consequences of ecological disasters, 85–100. New York: Springer. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue