Appraisal in the discourse of history teaching. Contributions to the analysis of androcentrism

In this article, I present a proposal for the study of androcentrism, generated from the analysis of a corpus composed of thirteen textbooks of History and Social Sciences, distributed by Chilean government between 1983 and 2013 in educational institutions subsidized by the State. Based on the appraisal framework (Martin, 2000; White, 2003; Martin [amp]amp; White 2005; Martin [amp]amp; Rose, 2007), this paper proposes to expand the subsystem of [amp]#8216;judgement[amp]#8217;, in the semantic domain of [amp]#8216;attitude[amp]#8217;, through the inclusion of four new categories (Attribute, Contribution, Significance and Achievement) to analyze the Social esteem of capacity. The proposal, based on Systemic functional linguistics (Halliday, 1994; Halliday [amp]amp; Matthiessen, 2004) and Critical discourse studies (van Dijk 1997, 2009; Fairclough, 2001; Wodak, 2001), along with favoring a more detailed analysis evaluative meanings, identifies distinctions in evaluating the capacity of men and women who tend to androcentric interpretations of the past. From the observation of the functioning of the categories listed, I can conclude that in the case of men, the meanings are presented in a way more inscribed in discourse, associated with their Attributes and their Contributions. In the case of women, however, the appraisal of the Capacity it appears more evoked related to Significance and Achievement.