The Analysis of Attitudinal Resources in Obama’s Victory Speech from Perspective of Appraisal Theory
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the first African president in American history, Obama’s victory speech is very noticeable and influential in political and social life. As a formal and well-prepared speech, it fully expresses Obama’s positions and policies on domestic and external affairs. James Martin and Peter White in nineties of the 20th century firstly introduced the Appraisal Theory which has its origin in the framework of Systemic Functional Linguistics. Appraisal Theory, as the extension and supplement for Halliday’s Systemic-Functional Theory, concerns how various resources are applied to convey attitudes and negotiate relationships and comprises three sub-types: Attitude, Engagement and Graduation. In this thesis, the researcher attempts to make an analysis of attitudinal resources in president Obama’s victory speech from the perspective of Appraisal Theory and to discover how resources of Affect, Judgment and Appreciation are applied to rebuild public confidence, minimize hostility, appeal to the public for national solidarity and rally the country to challenges ahead.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it