right brain damage and emotional expression in discourse

RIGHT BRAIN DAMAGE AND EMOTIONAL EXPRESSION IN DISCOURSE

Sue Sherratt

“Verbal communication is ordinarily and normally imbued with affective and attitudinal nuances” (Van Lancker & Pachana, 1998, p. 311)

Why is evaluation important?

• Expresses speaker’s opinion about something (and thereby values)

• Constructs and maintains relations between speaker and hearer

• Organises the discourse

The role of evaluation in narratives1. wards off the question “so what?”.

2. makes part of narrative prominent.

3. distinguishes narratives from other stretches of talk

4. allows the speaker to occupy the floor for longer

Right hemisphere & emotion – 2 hypotheses

RH hypothesis – RH is dominant for emotional processing

Valence hypothesis – RH is dominant for unpleasant/negative emotions.

RBD and emotional expression

Emotional expression may be verbal, nonverbal or extralinguistic

RBD investigations focused mostly on nonverbal and extralinguistic expression of emotion

Limited research into RBD and verbal expression of emotion

Verbal expression of emotion and RBD

Most studies have used rating scales.

Rated as less emotionally intense, reduced in emotionality, less accurate in emotions expressed.

2 studies of lexical emotional expression – reduction in emotional content and lower rate of affect words.

Assessment of verbal emotion

Complex – can be explicit or implicit, subjective, value-laden.

Tends to have been sidelined in linguistics (Martin 2004)

Few relevant analysis procedures

Appraisal (Martin and colleagues)“semantic resources used to negotiate emotions, judgement and valuations, alongside resources for amplifying and engaging with these evaluations” (Martin, 2000, p. 145).

Forms a “prosody of attitude” (Martin & Rose, 2003, p. 54) through the sample.

Appraisal resources

3 categories/dimensions

Appreciation

Affect

Judgement

Amplification – for grading the attitudes

Appraisal Categories

Appreciation

how speakers evaluate a text or a process

“What do you think of that?”

Affect

how something makes them feel

“How do you feel about it?”

Appraisal Categories contdJudgement

evaluation of the ethics, morality or social values of people’s behaviour

“How would you judge that behaviour?”

Amplification

how speakers grade their attitudes towards people, things or events.

Questions

Are speakers with RBD able to express emotion verbally and to what extent?

What appraisal resources do they use to do this?

Participants

• community-dwelling British males

• monolingual English-speaking

• minimum of 10 years of education

7 RBD participants

• Pre-morbidly strongly right-handed

• Single right hemisphere CVA

• Aged 54-77

• TPO 2y6m to 5 y

10 NBD participants

• right-handed

• matched for age and SES to RBD group

Narratives

2 narratives of personal experience

“Tell me about a frightening/funny experience that you have had at any time in your life”

Total appraisal resources (% total words)

Group Total Samples

(range)

RBD 4.5

(0-15.5)

NBD 6.4

(2.3-16.8)

Total appraisal by topic (%total words)

Group Frightening

(range)

Funny

(range)

RBD 4.6

(1.9-10.3)

5.5

(0-15.5)

NBD 6.3

(3.6-11.3)

5.9

(2.3-16.8)

Appraisal resources used (% of total appraisal)

Group App Affect Judge Amp

RBD 27.4 23.8 2.4 46.4

NBD 19.4 24.6 4.2 51.8

Appraisal by topic (% of total appraisal)

Group Apprec Affect Judge Amp

RBD FR 31.9 11 3.3 53.9

RBD FN 27.4 27.4 7 37

NBD FR 12.3 24 2.6 59.9

NBD FN 21.9 27.9 4.5 45.3

Appreciation & affect (% of total appraisal) Apprec Affect

RBD - Fright 31.9 11

RBD - Funny 27.4 27.4

NBD - Fright 12.3 24

NBD - Funny 21.9 27.9

Judgement & amplification (% of total app)

Judge Amplific

RBD - Fright 3.3 53.9

RBD - Funny 7 37

NBD - Fright 2.6 59.9

NBD - Funny 4.5 45.3

Conclusions• Relative, not absolute, differences between groups

• RBD tended to use less, particularly for negative topic

• On positive topic, RBD and NBD similar.

• On negative topic, RBD appraised things more than expressing feelings

More questions than answers

• Effect of discourse genre?

• Specific/personally relevant negative topic?

• Other factors?

• Limitations of this study?

Final comments• Attitudinal analysis will never be completely

clear-cut and are still being developed

• Appraisal framework used has considerable merit

• Evaluation plays a constructive role in “organising sociality – how we share feelings in order to belong (Martin, 2004, p, 341).

RBD and social integration

The difficulties of people with RBD in emotion processing have marked effects on interpersonal interactions (Lehman Blake, 2003).

People with RBD are considered to be “disconnected from the world around them” (Myers,

1999) and as having “a social handicap at least as significant as aphasia” (Paradis, 1998)

Thank you