Ngôn ngữ đánh giá thang độ trong diễn ngôn văn học anh qua lăng kính dịch.

THE UNIVERSITY OF DA NANG
UNIVERSITY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE STUDIES

ĐOÀN PHAN ANH TRÚC

LANGUAGE OF GRADUATION IN ENGLISH
LITERARY DISCOURSE THROUGH THE LENS
OF TRANSLATION

DOCTORAL THESIS
IN SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES

Da Nang, 2022

THE UNIVERSITY OF DA NANG


UNIVERSITY OF FOREIGN LANGUAGE STUDIES

ĐOÀN PHAN ANH TRÚC

LANGUAGE OF GRADUATION IN ENGLISH
LITERARY DISCOURSE THROUGH THE LENS OF
TRANSLATION
Major

: ENGLISH LINGUISTICS

Code

: 92.20.201

DOCTORAL THESIS
IN SOCIAL SCIENCES AND HUMANITIES

SUPERVISOR: DR. LÊ THỊ GIAO CHI

Da Nang, 2022


1

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP
Except where reference is made in the text of the thesis, this thesis contains no
material published elsewhere or extracted in whole or in part from a thesis by which
I have qualified for or been awarded another degree or diploma.
No other person’s work has been used without due acknowledgements in the
thesis.
This thesis has not been submitted for the award of any degree or diploma in
any other tertiary institution.
Da Nang, February 2022

Doan Phan Anh Truc


2

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
First of all, I would like to express my special appreciation to my supervisor,
Dr. Lê Thị Giao Chi who whole-heartedly and conscientiously led me through the
whole process of my thesis. She gave me timely feedback, useful advice and

hearted support, especially inspiring words in exploring the field of translation. Her
constant encouragement together with endless formal and informal exchanges over
varying stages of the research, especially her meticulous attention to details when it
comes to proofreading and presenting the research results have enabled me to grow
as an independent researcher and inspired me in my research work as well as in my
teaching career. All of these have contributed to the fruitful completion of this
doctoral thesis.
My gratitude also extends to Assoc. Prof. Dr. Phan Văn Hòa, Assoc. Prof. Dr.
Trần Hữu Phúc, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nguyễn Văn Long, Dr. Huỳnh Ngọc Mai Kha, Assoc.
Prof. Dr. Nguyễn Thị Quỳnh Hoa, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Lưu Quý Khương, Dr. Ngũ Thiện
Hùng, Dr. Võ Thị Kim Anh, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Trần Văn Phước, Assoc. Prof. Dr.
Nguyễn Tất Thắng, Dr. Huỳnh Anh Tuấn, Dr. Võ Duy Đức for their precious and
insightful comments in the boards of examiners at the assignments, semina and the
pre-final thesis defence.
I would like to thank University of Foreign Language Studies, The Da Nang
University and the Faculty of English for their support and assistance in my
research during my years at UFLS and in the completion of my Ph.D.
I would like to thank the leader of Quang Nam University, Assoc. Prof. Dr.
Huynh Trong Duong for creating the best condition for my research work.
My thanks go to my colleagues and friends for sharing my workload and
encouraging me to undertake my thesis.
And finally, I am indebted to my family for the love and sacrifice they have
made, especially my children who are a great source of inspiration in my whole
professional and personal life, and above all, the endless support and motivation


3

that enable me to overcome all sorts of difficulty that I have encountered along the
way towards fulfilment of this demanding duty.

ABSTRACT
This thesis aims at investigating language of graduation, or rather
intensification, in English literary discourse through the lens of translation. The
study builds on the theoretical framework of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL)
by Halliday (1985; 2004) and the linguistic theory of Appraisal developed by
Martin and White (2005) with a view to examining the realisations of intensification
as embodied in English literary discourse. Via the lens of translation, the thesis
stands on the translation models by Nida (2004), Vinay and Darbelnet (2004) and
Munday (2012) to analyse the rendering of the expressions of intensification into
Vietnamese as well as strategies employed in the process of translation. The thesis
has been conducted using qualitative methods and descriptive research with
quantitative information in order to deal with problems. The data collected for this
research include a sample of around 2,121 expressions of intensification taken from
four selected English literary works of critical realism and socialist realism in the
period of mid-18th century and mid-19th century, and 400 expressions chosen with
their Vietnamese translated versions for an analysis of translation.
The research has expanded the category of intensification into three wellprescribed sub-types with examples taken from the literary discourse, namely (i)
isolating intensification; (ii) infusing intensification; and (iii) intensification via
rhetorical devices. This prescription can provide a detailed picture of intensification,
especially the various realizations of intensification at different ranks from word
level involving lexical words and non-lexical words to above-word level or ranks
like groups and clauses. The research helps illuminate intensification from a more
functional approach rather than from that of structural linguists and grammarians.
Noticeably, the research has discovered the nuances of the meaning of
intensification through the lens of translation. When it comes to communicating


4

across languages, the level of intensity can preserve or can be adjusted in the
inclination of sliding-up or sliding-down, at the same time, the thesis has
demonstrated strategies of translation used in the process of rendering the meaning
of intensification into Vietnamese. Hopefully, the thesis helps language learners and
researchers get better insights into the language of intensification as graduation in
this genre and apply it to learning and the practice of translation.


5


6

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter One............................................................................................................. 1
INTRODUCTION...................................................................................................1
1.1. Rationale.......................................................................................................1
1.2. Aims and Objectives.....................................................................................6
1.2.1. Aims........................................................................................................6
1.2.2. Objectives...............................................................................................6
1.3. Research Questions......................................................................................6
1.4. Scope of the Research...................................................................................7
1.5. Justification for the Research......................................................................8
1.6. Working Definitions.....................................................................................9
1.7. Organization of the Research....................................................................10
1.8. Chapter Summary......................................................................................12
Chapter Two...........................................................................................................13
LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL BACKGROUND................13
2.1. Review of Previous Studies........................................................................13

2.1.1. Appraisal..............................................................................................13
2.1.2. Graduation...........................................................................................17
2.1.3. Intensification......................................................................................19
2.1.4. Intensification as Graduation and Translation...................................29
2.2. Theoretical Background.............................................................................32
2.2.1. Systemic Functional Linguistics.........................................................32
2.2.1.1. An Overview of Systemic Functional Linguistics..........................32
2.2.1.2. Meaning in Systemic Functional Linguistics.................................34
2.2.1.3. Structure and System in Systemic Functional Linguistics.............36
2.2.2. Appraisal in Systemic Functional Linguistics.....................................38
2.2.2.1. Overview.......................................................................................38
2.2.2.2. Appraisal in English.......................................................................40


7

2.2.2.3. Graduation in Appraisal in English................................................42
2.2.2.4. Scale and Gradability.....................................................................45
2.2.2.5. Intensification in Appraisal in English...........................................46
2.2.3. Intensification and Word Classes in Vietnamese.................................54
2.2.4. Translation and Issues in Translation.................................................55
2.2.4.1. Defining Translation......................................................................55
2.2.4.2. Translation in Relation to Linguistic Theory.................................57
2.2.4.3. Meaning in Translation..................................................................59
2.2.4.4. Equivalence in Translation.............................................................60
2.2.4.5. Translation Strategies.....................................................................62
2.3. Chapter Summary......................................................................................64
Chapter Three........................................................................................................66
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.........................................................................66
3.1. Research Design..........................................................................................66

3.2. Research Methods......................................................................................67
3.2.1. Qualitative Method and Quantitative Information..............................68
3.2.2. Descriptive Research............................................................................69
3.3. Sampling.....................................................................................................69
3.4. Data Collection...........................................................................................70
3.4.1. Data Source Description......................................................................71
3.4.2. Theoretical Framework for Data Collection.......................................72
3.4.3. Criteria for Identifying Intensification................................................74
3.4.3.1. Identifying Isolating Intensification...............................................75
3.4.3.2. Identifying Infusing Intensification...............................................75
3.4.3.3. Identifying Intensification via Rhetorical Devices.........................76
3.5. Procedures for Data Collection.................................................................79
3.6. Data Analysis..............................................................................................80
3.6.1. Analytical Framework..........................................................................81
3.6.2. Procedures for Data Analysis..............................................................82


8

3.7. Reliability and Validity..............................................................................84
3.7.1. Reliability.............................................................................................84
3.7.2. Validity..................................................................................................85
3.8. Chapter Summary......................................................................................86
Chapter Four.........................................................................................................88
LINGUISTIC REALIZATIONS OF INTENSIFICATION AS GRADUATION
IN ENGLISH LITERARY DISCOURSE............................................................88
4.1. Intensification as Graduation Realized via Isolating Intensifiers...........89
4.1.1. Preamble...............................................................................................89
4.1.2. Intensification via Isolating Intensifiers.............................................89
4.1.2.1. Up/Down-scaling in Qualities........................................................90

4.1.2.2. Up/Down-scaling in Verbal Processes.........................................101
4.1.2.3. Up/Down-scaling in Modalities...................................................104
4.1.3. Intensification via Isolating Maximisers...........................................109
4.1.3.1. Up-scaling in Qualities.................................................................111
4.1.3.2. Up-scaling in Verbal Processes....................................................115
4.2. Intensification as Graduation Realized via Infusing Intensifiers..........118
4.2.1. Preamble.............................................................................................118
4.2.2. Intensification via Infusing Intensifiers............................................120
4.2.2.1. Up/Down-scaling in Qualities......................................................120
4.2.2.2. Up/Down-scaling in Verbal Processes.........................................130
4.2.2.3. Up/Down-scaling in Modalities...................................................135
4.3. Intensification Realized via Rhetorical Devices.....................................138
4.3.1. Intensification via Metaphors............................................................139
4.3.2. Intensification via Simile...................................................................143
4.3.3. Intensification via Hyperbole.............................................................146
4.3.4. Intensification via Repetition.............................................................148
4.4. Discussion..................................................................................................152
4.5. Chapter Summary....................................................................................156


9

Chapter Five........................................................................................................159
ISOLATING

INTENSIFICATION

AS

GRADUATION

IN

ENGLISH

LITERARY DISCOURSE THROUGH THE LENS OF TRANSLATION....159
5.1. Rendering of Isolating Intensification as Graduation into Vietnamese160
5.1.1. Preserving the Level of Intensity.......................................................161
5.1.2. Up-scaling the Level of Intensity.......................................................165
5.1.3. Down-scaling the Level of Intensity..................................................168
5.1.4. Loss of Intensity.................................................................................170
5.2. Discussion..................................................................................................171
5.3. Chapter Summary....................................................................................172
Chapter Six..........................................................................................................175
STRATEGIES IN THE VIETNAMESE TRANSLATION OF ISOLATING
INTENSIFICATION AS GRADUATION.........................................................175
6.1. Isolating Intensification as Graduation Rendered via Literal Translation
..........................................................................................................................176
6.1.1. Literal Translation.............................................................................177
6.1.2. Literal Transposition..........................................................................180
6.2. Isolating Intensification as Graduation Rendered via Implicitation....183
6.3. Isolating Intensification as Graduation Rendered via Explicitation....188
6.4. Isolating Intensification as Graduation Rendered via Restructuring and
Transposition...................................................................................................192
6.5. Isolating Intensification as Graduation Rendered via Modulation......194
6.6. Discussion..................................................................................................199
6.7. Chapter Summary....................................................................................202
Chapter Seven......................................................................................................204
CONCLUSIONS..................................................................................................204
7.1. Summary...................................................................................................204

7.1.1. Summary of the Subject Matter under Research..............................204
7.1.2. Summary of Key Findings.................................................................205


10

7.2. Implications for the Teaching and Learning of English, Translation, and
for the Practice of Translating........................................................................209
7.3. Limitations of the Study...........................................................................212
7.4. Suggestions for Further Research...........................................................212
REFERENCES....................................................................................................214
PUBLICATION LISTS.......................................................................................226
APPENDIX..........................................................................................................227


11

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AdvP

: Adverb Phrase

Adj

: Adjective

AP

: Adjective Phrase

CD

: Cambridge Advanced Learner’s Dictionary

Cl

: Clause

Det

: Determiner

Foc

: Focus

HIP

: Hyperbole Identification Procedure

Int

: Intensifier

Int_Max

: Intensifier as Maximiser

MIP

: Metaphor Identification Procedure

MIPVU

: Metaphor Identification Procedure Vrije Universiteit

N

: Noun

NP

: Noun Phrase

PP

: Prepositional Phrase

VP

: Verb Phrase

V

: Verb

VIP

: Verbal Irony Procedure

S

: Sentence

SFG

: Systemic Functional Grammar

SFL

: Systemic Functional Linguistics

Si

: Simile

SL

: Source Language

ST

: Source Text

TGG

: Transformational Generative Grammar

TT

: Target Text

TL

: Target Language


12

WH_E

: Wuthering Heights (English)

WH_V

: Wuthering Heights (Vietnamese ‘Đỉnh gió hú’)

MP_E

: The Man of Property (English)

MP_V

: The Man of Property (Vietnamese ‘Người tư hữu’)

MS_E

: The Moon and Sixpence (English)

MS_V

: The Moon and Sixpence (Vietnamese ‘Mặt trăng và đồng sáu xu’)

VF_E

: Vanity Fair (English)

VF_V

: Vanity Fair (Vietnamese ‘Hội chợ phù hoa’)

-

: negative

+

: positive


13

LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1. Compositional Layers.............................................................................37
Table 2.2. The Gradability of Attitudinal Meanings................................................43
Table 2.3. Gradability of Engagement Values.........................................................43
Table 2.4. Elements in Halliday’s Processes............................................................50
Table 2.5. Criteria to distinguish Implicitation from Explicitation..........................64
Table 4.1. Distribution of Intensification in English Literary Discourse.................88
Table 4.2. Distribution of Intensification via Isolating Intensifiers..........................89

Table 4.3. Distribution of Intensification via Isolating Intensifiers..........................90
Table 4.4. Distribution of Intensifiers with Up/Down-scaling of Qualities.............91
Table 4.5. Distribution of Intensifiers as Pre-modifiers...........................................92
Table 4.6. Distribution of Intensifiers as Pre-modifiers of Adverbs........................97
Table 4.7. Isolating Intensifiers Down-scaling of Verbal Processes......................102
Table 4.8. Level of Intensity of Certainty..............................................................106
Table 4.9. Intensifiers of Upscaling/Downscaling of Modalities...........................107
Table 4.10. Distribution of Isolating Maximisers modifying Qualities and Verbal
Processes...............................................................................................................110
Table 4.11. Isolating Maximisers modifying Qualities and Verbal Processes........111
Table 4.12. Distribution of Isolating Intensifiers of Adjectives and Adverbs.........112
Table 4.13. Distribution of Isolating Maximisers Up-scaling Verbal Processes....116
Table 4.14. Distribution of Verbal Processes being Upscaled by Isolating
Maximisers............................................................................................................117
Table 4.15. Distribution of Infusing Intensifiers in Qualities.................................120
Table 4.16. Infusing Intensifiers as Adjectives in sequences of Intensity ............122
Table 4.17. Individual Infusing Intensifiers as Adjectives ...................................123
Table 4.18. Distribution of Infusing Intensifiers as Adverbs..................................125
Table 4.19. Infusing Intensifiers as Adverbs qualifying Processes........................126


14

Table 4.20. Distribution of Intensification via Rhetorical Devices in

English

Literary Discourse.................................................................................................138
Table 4.21. Intensification via Simile Up-scaling of Qualities and Processes.......144
Table 4.22. Intensification via Hyperbole Up-scaling of Qualities and Processes. 146

Table 4.23. Distribution of Isolating Intensifiers in English Literary Discourse....154
Table 5.1. Distribution of manifestation of Isolating Intensifiers in Vietnamese
Translation............................................................................................................. 161
Table 5.2. Vietnamese Equivalents of English Isolating Maximisers modifying
Processes...............................................................................................................163
Table 5.3. Vietnamese Equivalents of English Isolating Intensifiers modifying
Qualities................................................................................................................164
Table 5.4. Vietnamese Equivalents of English Isolating Intensifiers being Up-scaled
via Translation.......................................................................................................166
Table 5.5. Vietnamese Equivalents of English Isolating Intensifiers being Downscaled via Translation............................................................................................168
Table 6.1. Distribution of Strategies used in the Vietnamese Translation of Isolating
Intensifiers.............................................................................................................176


15

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1. Levels or Strata of Language (from Eggins, 1994)................................35
Figure 2.2. Ideational, Interpersonal, and Textual Metafunctions...........................39
Figure 2.3. An Overview of Appraisal Resources (Martin & White, 2005, p. 38)...42
Figure 2.4. Graduation System (Martin & White, 2005, pp. 138, 141)....................44
Figure 2.5. Configuration of Process Elements (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2004, p.
176)......................................................................................................................... 49
Figure 2.6. Three-stage System of Translation (Nida & Taber, 1969, p. 33)...........57
Figure 3.1. Research Plan........................................................................................67
Figure 3.2. Theoretical Framework of Data Collection...........................................73
Figure 3.3. Analytical Framework...........................................................................81
Figure 4.1. Representation of Isolating Intensifiers according to their popularity...91
Figure 4.2. Sequences of lowering Qualities by Isolating Intensifiers.....................94
Figure 4.3. Sequences of raising Qualities by Isolating Intensifiers........................94

Figure 4.5. Distribution of Infusing Intensifiers....................................................119
Figure 4.6. Sequences of Infusing Intensifiers heightening Qualities....................126
Figure 4.7. Sequences of Infusing Intensifiers as nouns in relation to meaning....129
Figure 4.8. Sequences of Infusing Intensifiers as nouns constrasted in meaning
(Adapted from Cambridge Advance Learner’s Dictionary)...................................129
Figure 4.10. Distribution of Intensification via Metaphor.....................................139
Figure 6.1. Distribution of Isolating Intensification as Graduation Rendered via
Literal Translation.................................................................................................177


1

Chapter One
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Rationale
Language is, by all means, a vital tool for communication. It is used for a
variety of purposes, ranging from exchanging information, voicing one’s opinions
or comments, to revealing their feelings or points of view. It is a medium through
which people define values of things or present the speaker/writer’s comments,
commitments or their assessments towards things and phenomenon around us. It is
also a medium by which people focus on the information they wish to emphasize by
means of raising or lowering their voice on such information or by virtue of
amplifying the qualities of things and the processes of actions.
Communicative intents like these can be justified in a model of language
known as Appraisal developed by Martin and White (2005), an extension from one
type of metafunction, that is, the interpersonal meaning in the overarching paradigm
of Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) by Halliday and his colleagues. Language
of Appraisal, as its name implies, is a model whereby three categories of meanings
are prescribed: (i) Attitude, (ii) Engagement, and (iii) Graduation. Via the domain
of Attitude, speakers/writers not only “encode what they present as their attitudes”

but also “activate evaluative stances and position readers/listeners to supply their
own assessments” (Martin & White, 2005, p. 2). Engagement, on the other hand, is
extended from such domains as modality, epistemic modality and evidentiality by
means of its focus not only on speaker’s/writer’s knowledge, belief, certainty, and
commitment towards state-of-affairs but also on the way “the textual voice positions
itself with respect to other voices and other positions” (Martin & White, 2005, p. 2).
Graduation is then identified from the perspective of ‘intensification’ and ‘vague
language’, and this is meant to show “how speakers/writers increase and decrease
the force of their assertions and how they sharpen or blur semantic categorisations
with which they operate” (Martin & White, 2005, p. 2).
These three major categories of meaning separate from one another, but they


2

are in a close relationship. Under the Appraisal framework introduced by Martin
and White (2005), Attitude construes positive and negative feelings (effect),
attitudes towards behaviours (judgement) or evaluations of semiotic and natural
phenomena (appreciation) (pp. 42-43). Engagement, on the other hand, involves the
meanings which “construe for the text a heteroglossic backdrop of prior utterances,
alternative viewpoints and anticipated responses” (Martin & White, 2005, p. 97).
For Graduation, which is associated with up-scaling and down-scaling of feelings
(p. 135) has a relevant relation to Attitude and Engagement in terms of strength.
This happens because gradability, according to Martin and White, is a “general
property of all attitudinal meanings of values of affect, judgement and appreciation”
that they construe positively or negatively low or high degrees (2005, p. 135). What
is more, gradability is seen as a feature of the Engagement system, of which
Engagement values scale for the degree of the speaker/writer’s intensity, or the
degree of their investment in the utterance (Martin & White, 2005, pp. 135-136).
Hence, we can see Attitude and Engagement as Domains of Graduation which differ

according to the nature of the meanings scaled (ibid.).
Also, in Martin and White’s typology (2005, p. 137), Graduation exists along
two axes of scalability including that of grading based on intensity or amount, and
that of grading based on prototypicality and preciseness. Regarding intensity and
amount, its nature is scalar assessments over qualities, processes and verbal
modalities recognized as Intensification, and over entities recognized as
Quantification. In this way, the core of Graduation is to consider how strong or
weak the feeling is seen as Force. With respect to prototypicality, when viewed
from an experiential perspective, its nature is not scalable categories including
sharpen and soften recognized as Focus. So, the Graduation is adjusting the strength
of boundaries between categories which operate in experiential taxonomies.
Because Focus belongs to experiential categories, it has a relation to attitudinal
assessment determined by the specific semantics of the graduated category.
There is no doubt that if speakers or writers do not grasp the nature of


3

Graduation, they will barely understand deeply how it operates in discourse. This is
also the reason why Benzinger (1971) believes that listeners can fail to comprehend
the full impact of what speakers are saying, and speakers cannot convey multiple
degrees of values without using intensification to focus on the meaning of their
statements. As a result, they will not express all what they would like to send to
receivers to achieve communicative target as they wish.
An overarching sketch of Appraisal in general and of Graduation, in particular,
has been drawn, yet to look at this framework as a whole is not what this thesis is
intended for. Rather, the focus of this thesis is on intensity which denotes
speakers/writers’ assessment of grading in the form of intensification. Let’s observe
it in the following illustrations.
[1] I think that in both our interests it would be extremely undesirable that matters

should be so left at this stage. (MP_E, p.116)
[2] He had heard on Forsyte ‘Change much comment, much rather doubtful praise
of this house. (MP_E, p. 218)
[3] A dumb and grumbling anger swelled his bosom. (MP_E, p. 32)
[4] It had been forgotten that love is no hot-house flower. (MP_E, p. 98)
[5] As for themselves, to sit hour after hour, dead tired ... (MP_E, p. 130)
[6] He could not hear Bosinney entreating, entreating, always entreating. (MP_E, p.
141)

By observing its realizations, we can see that the cases of intensification
discussed here are different from what structural linguists and grammarians talk
about. The signals for intensification as in [1], [2], [5] and [6] are adverbs known as
lexico-grammatical class of isolating, i.e., an individual item solely “performing the
function of setting the level of intensity” (Martin & White, 2005, p. 141) while that
in [3] is a verb and that in [4] is a phrase. The signals for intensification which
linguists mention before are not seen as verbs, phrases or even clauses. These are
called intensification through infusing whereby “there is no separate lexical form
conveying the sense of up-scaling or down-scaling”, and any item itself conveys a
meaning of the scaling known as lexico-grammatical class of infusing (Martin &


4

White, 2005, p. 141).
This diversity of realizations of intensification results from a model of
language to functional approach suggested by Martin and White (2005) which
chooses meaning in context as its priority. It is meaning which creates forms of
language, which then dictates various forms of language embodying intensification.
However, this embodiment of language of intensification has not been well explored
in English literary discourse yet, nor has the way meaning of intensification been

transferred into Vietnamese.
Clearly, changes or shifts are very likely when rendering forms of
intensification into Vietnamese. Let’s consider the following examples.
[7] I think that in both our interests it would be extremely undesirable that matters
should be so left at this stage. (MP_E, p. 116)
Tơi tin vì quyền lợi của hai chúng ta, tơi thiết tha mong rằng công việc không bị
gián đoạn ở đây. (MP_V, p. 229)
[8] His face was perfectly round. (MS_E, p. 70)
Gương mặt anh tròn trịa. (MS_V, p. 19)

By rendering the meaning of elements of intensification as shown in the
English original, we can see some transformations in the lexicon and in the structure
of the Vietnamese text, that is, to ensure the equivalent effect of translation (Nida,
1964), the translator has to resort to some restructuring in the lexico-grammar of the
target text, or put another way, ‘shifts’ are an inevitable trend in efforts to produce a
natural translation.
Practically, to the best of my knowledge, the category of intensification under
the umbrella of Graduation has not been widely and deeply explored yet. The
problems might lie in the fact that language users may not have been aware of the
presence of such kind of language in discourse, nor have they recognized the
importance of using this for more successful communication. Attempts to diversify
the language forms to convey the message more effectively to receivers for
communicative effect are likely to be neglected by speakers/writers. Or perhaps the
significance, functions as well as roles of language used for evaluation have not


5

been fully understood by speakers/writers. So, they are likely to ignore the means of
conveying the meanings which denote speakers or writers’ attitudes and feelings.

These result in the limit of the enrichment of forms conveying the content of the
communication.
In English language learning in general and in translation learning in
particular, learners and translators may not be fully aware of changes or negative
language transfers of word-order. This might happen because of the fact that they
have not fully realized that languages differ, and English and Vietnamese are no
exception. English and Vietnamese are never identical. It is evident that while
English is an inflectional language and tends to move closer to analytic languages,
Vietnamese is an isolating one (Lieber, 2010, p. 132), hence the occurrence of
translation shifts and negative language transfer is obvious. In addition, Vietnamese
learners of English might cope with transferring the meaning from the source
language to the target text, and thus they often leave some errors in their translation.
Exploring these variants and changes in the Vietnamese translation is thus by no
means of any less importance for language learners and translators.
Given a number of studies conducted in several aspects of the theory of
Appraisal, there is still little research done in the arena of Graduation, especially
from lens of intensification in English literary discourse, and how signals for
intensification are translated into Vietnamese. Therefore, the thesis takes its focus
on the language of Graduation, especially, the case of intensification under the lens
of translation. The study attaches an importance to discovering how the language of
intensification operates in English literary discourse, what linguistic means help
embody this meaning of intensification, and how the meaning of intensification in
English has been rendered into Vietnamese. Understanding how the language of
intensification operates in English literary discourse, and how this meaning is
transferred via the Vietnamese translation is necessary and useful in the sense that it
contributes to a better insight into the manipulation of this category of language so
as to be able to achieve the target of communication across English and Vietnamese.


6

For these reasons, “Language of Graduation in English Literary Discourse
through the Lens of Translation” has been chosen as the topic for my doctoral
thesis.

1.2. Aims and Objectives
1.2.1. Aims
This study aims to investigate the language used for denoting graduation in
English literary discourse. Basing on the theoretical framework of Appraisal
proposed by Martin and White (2005), it lays its focus particularly on how
intensification as graduation is realized via linguistic and stylistic means in English
literary discourse. A comparison among expressions for intensification is
established to recognize what sub-groups are preferable to be used in this type of
discourse. The study also seeks to examine how intensification is conveyed via the
lens of translation, that is, how English intensification is rendered into Vietnamese
and what strategies have been adopted via translation. The study is hoped to provide
language learners and researchers with better insights into the language of
intensification as graduation in this literary genre and how it can be implied in
language teaching and learning, and in the practice of translation.

1.2.2. Objectives
The study is intended to
o examine the linguistic realisations of intensification as graduation in
English literary discourse;
o explore the rendering of isolating intensification as graduation into
Vietnamese, or rather identify how the level of intensity shifts when the
meaning of isolating intensification as graduation is rendered into
Vietnamese;
o work out the common strategies which have been adopted in the translation
of English isolating intensification as graduation in English literary

discourse into Vietnamese.


7

1.3. Research Questions
The research attempts to answer the following questions:
1. What are the linguistic realizations of intensification as graduation in
English literary discourse?
2. How are the realizations of isolating intensification rendered into
Vietnamese?
3. What strategies have been adopted in the Vietnamese translation of the
English realizations of isolating intensification?

1.4. Scope of the Research
In the Language of Appraisal by Martin and White (2005), Graduation is
prescribed as comprising of Focus and Force with the latter being subdivided into
Intensification and Quantification. The language of Graduation in English literary
discourse is investigated with focus particularly on the case of intensification, which
means other aspects of Graduation - Focus and Quantification of Force - are not
dealt with in this thesis.
Covering all the cases of intensification in the literary corpus seems an
impossible task because the data collected can hardly be managed. For this reason,
the researcher decided to exclude the cases of isolating intensification which are
realized by means of comparative and superlative constructions. As for the aspect of
translation, only the cases of isolating intensification have been selected as they
provide a manageable sample to explore how the meaning of intensification has
been rendered via translation. Moreover, via the lens of translation, the thesis stands
on the translation models by Nida (2004), Vinay and Darbelnet (2004) and Munday
(2012) for the analysis of the rendering the expressions of intensification into

Vietnamese as well as strategies employed in the process of translation.
Specifically, the principles of correspondence proposed by Nida (2004) and the
adjustments of level of intensity via translation by Munday (2012) are also adopted
to illuminate the extent to which isolating intensification has been transferred into
Vietnamese, either in whole or in part. The methodology of translation introduced
by Vinay and Darbelnet (2004) is another resource that facilitates the analysis of


8

strategies exploited in the process of rendering the meaning of intensification into
Vietnamese.
Moreover, the language of intensification under investigation is situated in
works of critical and socialist realism in the period of mid-18th century and mid-19th
century. Chief among them are Vanity Fair by Thackeray (1947), Wuthering
Heights by Brontë (1847), the Man of Property by Galworthy (1906), and the Moon
and Sixpense by Maugham (1919). The Vietnamese translated versions - Hội chợ
phù hoa by Trần Kiệm (2006), Đỉnh gió hú by Nguyễn Vân Hà (2018), Người tư
hữu by Hoàng Túy and Cảnh Lâm (1986), Mặt trăng và đồng sáu xu by Nguyễn
Thành Thống (1987) respectively - are also taken as source of data used for
examining the rendering of intensification into Vietnamese and for analyzing
translation strategies.

1.5. Justification for the Research
This thesis delves into the linguistic realisations of Intensification, an aspect of
language of Appraisal subsumed in the category of Graduation as prescribed in the
Appraisal framework proposed by Martin and White (2005). The thesis has taken its
source of data within the English literary discourse, which is deemed to carry a tone
of voice much characterized by varying levels of intensification. Through the lens
of translation, the expression of intensification meaning can be illuminated with

justification made by the translator when attempting to render the nuance of
intensification from the source language text into the target language text,
prompting several translation shifts to occur for equivalence in communication. The
thesis is thus beneficial for language learners and language researchers who wish to
master the language in use for different communicative intents in different
communicative contexts within and even across languages. The contribution of the
thesis can be seen in three different aspects as follows.
Theoretically, building on the model of Appraisal proposed by Martin and
White (2005) with a sub-section devoted to Intensification as Graduation, the thesis
has expanded the category of intensification into several well-prescribed sub-types