In:Multilingual Corpus Research: Advances and challenges
Edited by Noelia Ramón and María Pérez Blanco
[Studies in Corpus Linguistics 126] 2026
► pp. 71–90
Chapter 3The use of effectivity in opinion articles about the Ukraine migrant crisis
Published online: 20 February 2026
https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.126.03mor
https://doi.org/10.1075/scl.126.03mor
Abstract
This study examines the use of effective stance, i.e., the positioning of the speaker or writer regarding the realisation of
events, in opinion articles on the Ukrainian refugee crisis published in 2022–2023 in The Guardian (UK) and
elDiario (Spain). A corpus of over 20,000 words, including English and Spanish, was annotated for six effective stance
categories: Deonticity, Directivity, Inclination, Intentionality, Normativity, and Potentiality. Results reveal significant
cross-linguistic differences, with Spanish texts using more Deonticity and Normativity markers, reflecting a focus on collective
responsibility. English texts, on the other hand, emphasise Directivity and Potentiality, adopting a more individualistic and persuasive
tone. These findings highlight the role of language in shaping public attitudes towards the refugee crisis and global humanitarian
issues.
Keywords: effective stance, opinion articles, migrant crisis, Ukraine
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Theoretical background
- 2.1Opinion sharing and stance taking
- 2.2Effective stance
- 3.Corpus and methodology
- 3.1Corpus selection
- 3.2Analytic procedure
- 4.Results and discussion
- 4.1Usage frequencies of effective stance in English and Spanish
- 4.2Realisations of effective stance in English and Spanish
- 5.Conclusions
Acknowledgements Notes References
References (31)
Biber, D., & Finegan, E. (1989). Styles of stance in English: Lexical and grammatical marking of evidentiality and affect. Text, 9(1), 93–124.
Carretero, M., & Domínguez Romero, E. (2024). Effective stance in conservative newspaper opinion articles on irregular immigration and refugee humanitarian
crises. Alicante Journal of English Studies, 41, 7–29.
Chilton, P., & Schäffner, C. (1997). Discourse and politics. In T. A. Van Dijk (Ed.), Discourse as social interaction (pp. 206–230). Sage.
DuBois, J. W. (2007). The stance triangle. In R. Englebretson (Ed.), Stancetaking in discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction (pp. 139–182). John Benjamins.
Du Bois, J. W., & Kärkkäinen, E. (2012). Taking a stance on emotion: Affect, sequence, and intersubjectivity in dialogic interaction. Text & Talk, 32(4), 433–451.
Englebretson, R. (2007). Introduction. In R. Englebretson (Ed.), Stancetaking in Discourse: Subjectivity, evaluation, interaction (pp. 1–26). John Benjamins.
Esses, V. M., Medianu, S., & Lawson, A. S. (2013). Uncertainty, threat, and the role of the media in promoting the dehumanisation of immigrants and refugees. Journal of Social Issues, 69(3), 518–536.
Hart, C. (2011). Legitimising assertions and the logico-rhetorical module: Evidence and epistemic vigilance in media discourse on
immigration. Discourse Studies, 13(6), 751–769.
King, R., & Wood, N. (2001). Media and migration: Constructions of mobility and difference. Routledge.
(2013). Modals: Striving for control. In J. I. Marín-Arrese, M. Carretero, J. Arús, & J. van der Auwera (Eds.), English modality: Core, periphery and evidentiality (pp. 3–55). Mouton de Gruyter.
Marín Arrese, J. I. (2004). Evidential and epistemic qualifications in the discourse of fact and opinion: A comparable corpus study. In J. I. Marín Arrese (Ed.), Perspectives on evidentiality and modality (pp. 153–184). Editorial Complutense.
Marín-Arrese, J. I. (2007). Stance and subjectivity/intersubjectivity in political discourse: A contrastive case study. Belgian Journal of English Language and Literatures, 5, 113–132.
(2009). Effective vs. epistemic stance and subjectivity/ intersubjectivity in political discourse: A case study. In A. Tsangalidis & R. Facchinetti (Eds.), Studies on English modality. In Honour of Frank R. Palmer (pp. 23–52). Peter Lang.
(2011). Effective vs. epistemic stance and subjectivity in political discourse: Legitimising strategies and mystification of
responsibility. In C. Hart (Ed.), Critical discourse studies in context and cognition (pp. 193–224). John Benjamins.
(2013). Stancetaking and inter/subjectivity in the Iraq inquiry: Blair vs. Brown. In J. I. Marín-Arrese, M. Carretero, J. Arús & J. van der Auwera (Eds.), English modality: Core, periphery and evidentiality (pp. 411–445). Mouton de Gruyter.
(2021a). Stance, emotion and persuasion: Terrorism and the press. Journal of Pragmatics, 177, 135–148.
(2021b). Winds of war: Epistemic and effective control in political discourse. Culture, language and representation, XXVI, 289–307.
Marín-Arrese, J. I., Mora-López, N., & Ferrer-Navas, S. (2024). Legitimisation and persuasion in discourse: Effective stance in journalistic and political discourse in English and
Spanish. In A. Baicchi & C. Broccias (Eds.), Constructional and cognitive explorations of contrastive linguistics (pp. 153–172). Springer.
Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. R. (2005). The language of evaluation: Appraisal in English. Palgrave Macmillan.
Martín de la Rosa, V., Domínguez Romero, E., Pérez Blanco, M. & Marín-Arrese, J. I. (2020). Epistemic and effective stance in political discourse: The European refugee crisis. In L. N. Berlin (Ed.), Positioning and stance in political discourse (pp. 141–156). Vernon Press.
Mora-López, N., & Ferrer-Navas, S. (2023). An English-Spanish contrastive analysis of effective stance in newspaper and political discourse. In J. I. Marín-Arrese, L. Hidalgo-Downing, & J. R. Zamorano-Mansilla (Eds.), Stance, inter/subjectivity and identity in discourse (pp. 57–74). Peter Lang.
Thompson, G., & Alba-Juez, L. (Eds.). (2014). Evaluation in context. John Benjamins.
