Evaluation in US and Japanese history textbooks

Abstract

Abstract This paper attempts to make a corpus and cross-linguistic study of how the Pacific War is evaluated in US and Japanese history textbooks by drawing upon Systemic Functional Linguistics and the Appraisal System. The global pattern of evaluation in the data is such that the US history textbook gives more value to acts and things, creates an authoritative voice excluding alternative positions, and has a delicate construal for the extent of evaluation. By contrast, the Japanese history textbook displays a subjective affective stance and a flagged authorial voice strengthened by alternative positions. A detailed discourse analysis of the lexicogrammar in the Pacific War narratives of the US and Japanese history textbooks further shows different evaluation orientations for the construal of images of the United States and Japan. The US history textbook characterizes the United States as a state of military power and high morality for its military operations in the Pacific War while censuring Japan’s cruelty of attack, whereas the Japanese history textbook highlights Japan’s tenacity and voluntary acts on the battlefield while condemning the United States for its immorality of bombing.