Corpus Linguistics and the Appraisal Framework for Retrieving Emotion and Stance – The Case of Samsung’s and Apple’s Facebook Pages

  • Amelia Regina Burns
  • Olimpia Matarazzo
  • Lucia Abbamonte
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 26)


The study investigated the situated linguistic interactions of the users of the Samsung and Apple Facebook pages, with a focus on the attitudinal/affectual values they displayed towards these brands and their products, in a comparative perspective. Following Corpus Linguistics (CL) methodology, two corpora were created, named AppleCorpus (7337 tokens) and SamsungCorpus (5216 tokens), consisting in the wall posts on Apple Inc. and Samsung Mobile pages collected over a period of four days. These corpora were scrutinized both in a CL quantitative perspective and in a qualitative perspective by using the resources of the Appraisal Framework (AF) for discourse analysis to better identifying these social network users’ stance and attitudinal positioning. The findings of this pilot study showed that Samsung’s users display a more positive attitude toward the brand than Apple’s users. Results are discussed in the text.


Appraisal Framework Corpus Linguistics Word-Smith Tools Keywords Emotion and Stance Facebook Apple Samsung 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Clore, G.L.: Affective Coherence: Affect as Embodied Evidence in Attitude, Advertising, and Art. In: Semin, G.R., Smith, E. (eds.) Embodied Grounding: Social, Cognitive, Affective, and Neuroscientific Approaches, pp. 211–236. Cambridge University Press, New York (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Damasio, A.: The Feeling of What Happens: Body, Emotion and the Making of Consciousness. Harcourt Brace, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dolan, R.J.: Emotion, cognition, and behavior. Science 298(5596), 1191–1194 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gibbs, R.W.: Embodied experience and linguistic meaning. Brain and Language 84(1), 1–15 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Goodman, J.C., Dale, P.S., Li, P.: Does frequency count? Parental input and the acquisition of vocabulary. Journal of Child Language 35, 515–531 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gries, S.T.: Multifactorial analysis in corpus linguistics: a study of particle placement. Continuum Press, London (2003)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Izard, C.E.: Human Emotions. Plenum Pless, New York (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kepser, S., Reis, M.: Linguistic evidence: empirical, theoretical and computational perspectives. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Niedenthal, P.M., et al.: Embodiment of Emotion Concepts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 96(6), 1120–1136 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Oakes, M., Farrow, M.: Use of the chi-squared test to examine vocabulary differences in English language corpora representing seven different countries. Literary and Linguistic Computing 22, 85–99 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Scott, M.: WordSmith Tools 4.0. O.U.P, Oxford (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Stefanowitsch, A.: New York, Dayton (Ohio), and the raw frequency fallacy. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 1(18), 295–301 (2006)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tognini-Bonelli, E.: Corpus Linguistics at work. Studies in corpus Linguistics. Amsterdam, Benjamins (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    White, P.R.: The Appraisal Website: The Language of Attitude, Arguability and Interpersonal Positioning (2012), (June 15, 2012)

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Amelia Regina Burns
    • 1
  • Olimpia Matarazzo
    • 2
  • Lucia Abbamonte
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of LawSecond University of NaplesCasertaItaly
  2. 2.Department of PsychologySecond University of NaplesCasertaItaly

Personalised recommendations