## Discourse Analysis of the 2022 Australian Tennis Open: A Multimodal Appraisal Perspective

## Abstract

This  article  presents  a  preliminary  analysis  of  a  corpus  of  texts  relating  to  the  2022  Australian  Tennis  Open  using  a multimodal appraisal framework. The study utilises quantitative and qualitative content analysis to examine media reports, official statements, and public reactions to the incident, which centred around Novak Djokovic's vaccination status. The analysis focusses on assessing how evaluative language contributes to community-building and identifies the underlying values, beliefs, and evaluations that shape stakeholders' emotional, cognitive, and behavioural responses. The  appraisal  framework,  encompassing  attitude,  engagement,  and  graduation,  serves  as  a  comprehensive  tool  for categorising resources that express evaluation. Furthermore, the article delves into the application of appraisal analysis within the context of multimodal and online discourse, encompassing various platforms such as newspapers, television, radio,  YouTube, Twitter, Instagram, blogs, official political statements, and court rulings. By examining these diverse media, the study seeks to investigate the dynamic discourse interplay surrounding the 2022 Australian Open, highlighting the pivotal role of evaluative communication in fostering alignment among readers through shared values and attitudes. The preliminary findings suggest that access to greater semiotic recourses increases consensus. The gains from using this interpretative framework are an asset, facilitating the coding of a large data set and attending the different manifestations of  discourses  around  the  player's  participation.  As  discourse  continues  to  shape  societal  narratives,  this  multimodal appraisal investigation contributes to our understanding of the complex dynamics inherent in discourse construction and the influence of evaluative language in shaping collective perception.

## Keywords

Appraisal, Discourse Analysis, Multimodality, Visual Attitude, Paralanguage, Multimodal Corpus

## 1. Introduction

There  are  many  linguistic  analyses  regarding  online  communication,  few  have  dealt  with meaning in online language through the Appraisal framework. Appraisal Theory (Martin & White, 2005) was chosen as a method of analysis as the associated  annotation lends great  potential  for corpus-based discourse approaches, leading to interesting understandings also with small corpora. Appraisal Theory deals with how evaluative language aligns readers according to common values and attitudes. Since 2005, Appraisal has been used to: analyse static multimodal texts (Economou 2009, Swain 2012, Mills & Stone et al. 2020); it has also been applied to online discourse (language) and combined with corpus techniques (Cavasso & Taboada 2021, Drasovean & Tagg 2015); recently a model has also been proposed for paralanguage that incorporates Appraisal (Martin & Zappavigna 2019; Ngo, Hood et al. 2021). To the best knowledge of this researcher, no studies have dealt with a multimodal discourse Appraisal analysis of a corpus of online texts. In this article Appraisal Theory is used to investigate how evaluative communication conveys readers' alignment to common values and attitudes (Zappavigna 2011) in a small corpus of texts dealing with the 2022 Australian Open. This article presents the methods and preliminary results of a multimodal appraisal analysis on a small  corpus  of  texts  relating  to  the  2022  Australian  Tennis  Open,  which  was  dominated  by  a vaccination issue that centred on the tournament favourite, Novak Djokovic.

*  Nickolas Komninos Dept. of Languages and Literatures, Communication, Education and Society University of Udine nickolas.komninos@uniud.it

The analysis is based on a quantitative and qualitative content analysis of media reports, official statements, and public reactions to the incident. The texts come from a variety of online sources, and employ  various  semiotic  resources,  including  synchronous  and  asynchronous  communication  and static,  dynamic and interactive texts. Appraisal Theory is used to: enquire how evaluative language contributes to community-building and to identify the underlying values, beliefs, and evaluations that shape the emotional, cognitive, and behavioural responses of the various stakeholders involved.

## 2. The 2022 Australian Tennis Open

The  2022  Australian  Tennis  Open  was  controversial  as  it  occurred  during  the  Covid-19  era.  The favourite, Novak Djokovic, did not set foot on a tennis court, but was in and out of the law courts and was  finally  deported.  In  the  context  of  Australia's  pandemic  experience,  few  Australians  had  any sympathy for Novak Djokovic's 11 days in Melbourne's courts.

In the previous months, Djokovic had never clearly voiced his vaccination opinions. In April 2020, before the availability of Covid-19 vaccinations, Djokovic had mentioned his vaccination opposition, subsequently stating that not being an expert he would keep an open mind, but that as a high-level sportsman he wanted to keep his right to choose what was entered his body. Some interpreted his vaccine hesitancy as being associated with the 'anti-vax' movement.

In October 2021 Alex Hawke, Minister for Immigration, had declared that Djokovic could not come to the Australian Open if he did not satisfy the vaccination mandate to the full. In November 2021, Djokovic stated: 'When official condition requirements to travel to Australia and play in Australia are out, then obviously I'll see what I personally do with that, and also the bigger group of the players, you know, because the situation is obviously different in Australia than most parts of the world'.

On the 4th January 2022, Djokovic declared via Instagram that he was heading to Australia. This announcement  triggered  anxiety  in  Australia  and  especially  in  Melbourne  (the  location  of  the tournament) which had endured an extremely strict lockdown. The conditions of his exemption were unknown.

Djokovic flew to Australia to play in the Australian Open. The tournament organisers had provided him with a medical exemption from the requirement to be vaccinated against Covid-19, following a State  Government  authority  process.  He  had  a  Federal  Government  visa  to  enter  Australia.  On Wednesday 5 th January 2022, Australian PM Scott Morrison had said to reporters on the Djokovic issue: 'Well, that is a matter for the Victorian government. They have provided him with an exemption to come to Australia, and so we then act in accordance with that decision'.

While  Djokovic  was  mid-flight,  Prime  Minister  Scott  Morrison  announced,  in  conflict  with  his previous statement some hours beforehand, that it was a Federal Government matter and activated his public servants (Australian Border Force) who cancelled Djokovic's visa on his arrival. The premise was that the Minister may cancel a visa if he or she is satisfied that:. . . the presence of its holder in Australia is or may be, or would or might be, a risk to: the health, safety or good order of the Australian community or a segment of the Australian community.

Djokovic challenged the decision before the Federal Circuit Court, a judge reversed Djokovic's deportation decision on 10th January 2022 as being unreasonable. The Government conceded that the visa cancellation was unlawful. The Federal Circuit Court ordered Djokovic's immediate release from detention amid much demonstration from various groups that had formed around this incident: the antivax movement, tennis enthusiasts, Djokovic supporters, Serbians in Australia that felt affronted by the treatment  of  their  sporting  ambassador  against  pro-vax  supporters,  indignant  Australians  that  felt motivated to demonstrate their anger.

Subsequently, it emerged that Djokovic had contracted Covid-19 on the 16th December 2021. This had been the reason for his medical exemption for entry, which had been approved (anonymously) by two panels of independent medical experts set up by both Tennis Australia and the Government of Victorian. The Federal Government of Australia approves non-national entry into Australia (Australian Department of Health 2022) 1 and Djokovic's exemption to travel to Victoria had been issued by the state of Victorian. It also emerged that Djokovic had met a group of children for a PR tennis event after he had contracted Covid-19.

After days of significant private and public debate, Alex Hawke Minister for Immigration, used his discretionary 'God Powers' (Kampark 2022), under section 133C(3) of the Migration Act 1958, to revoke Djokovic's visa again as he could be a risk to Australia. These discretional 'God Powers' are not  subject  to  any  appeal  process,  or  principles  of  natural  justice  (Higgins  2022).  Importantly,  the Minister conceded that Djokovic posed a negligible risk via disease transmission but that Djokovic's presence  in  Australia  may  pose  a  risk  to  the  Australian  community,  and  good  order,  because  his presence in the country may foster anti-vaccination sentiment (Federal Court of Australia 2022g P.23).

The Minister's motivation for Djokovic's visa cancellation was how the Australian people 'may perceive his views on vaccinations', even if Djokovic's views differed from what had been publicly attributed to him. Djokovic was not deported for what he had done, or said, or even thought, but instead because of what others might think he thinks, based on what he had not done, namely, his failure to get vaccinated.

A federal court made up of three judges dismissed Djokovic's appeal to revoke the cancelation of his visa on 16th January 2022. The grounds for their ruling was that his being in Australia might cause 'civil unrest' due to him being a 'talisman of anti-vaccination sentiment' (Federal Court of Australia 2022d). Djokovic was deported and had to withdraw from the tournament.

This saga and final federal court decision split Australian as well as global opinion, with many questioning the fairness to oblige Djokovic, or anyone else, to receive a vaccine to have entry to a country in order to work. Many Australians had the opinion that after everything they had been through, why should Djokovic not go through it too. Critics believed vaccine mandates as a condition of entry breached human rights and an individual's freedom to decide what enters their body. Also deporting Djokovic restricted his right to earn an income. Many believed Djokovic had found a loophole and would earn significant sums of money from participating in the Australian Open due to this. Many believed his presence made a mockery of their lockdown suffering and collective effort to reduce the impact of Covid-19.

The  issue  stimulated  much  debate,  not  only  on  Covid-19  policy  but  also  how  sacrifice  for  the perception  of  a  common  good  can  generate  conflict  for  individuals  and  personal  freedoms.  These debates  were  fed  by  statements  and  opinions  from  various  sources:  court  rulings,  heads  of  state (Australian and Serbian), ministers (Australian and Serbian), sports personalities (tennis and other), public figures  and  media  celebrities (TV,  radio  and  Internet  personalities).  Because of the ongoing Covid-19 lockdowns, everyday people, especially Australians, felt involved and took positions and expressed opinions.

These exchanges of opinions and debates were carried out in all contexts and on various media, newspaper, TV, radio, YouTube, Twitter, Instagram, blogs, official  political statements (live  video statements,  published  transcripts  and  press  releases),  court  rulings  (video  statements  and  published rulings) and so on. Some of these media channels were monologic statement monogloss (court rulings, written statements), others allowed various degrees of dialogic interaction, heterogloss: through realtime  questions  in  interviews  (restricted  attendance),  and  asynchronous  comments  (Newspaper, YouTube,  Twitter,  blogs)  and  synchronous  unrestricted  exchanges.  These  interactions  were  all multimodal, but there was also a hierarchy of access allocated to semiotic recourses, not all users had the same access to communicative resources. Table 1 details a timeline of events and documentation of those events.

[1.  https://www.health.vic.gov.au/medical-exemption-to-covid-19-vaccination-guidance-word](https://www.health.vic.gov.au/medical-exemption-to-covid-19-vaccination-guidance-word)

| DATE     | EVENT                                                                                                                                       | LINK                                                                                                                                                                                                           |
|----------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2/01/22  | Victorian State Government issues Djokovic a Border Travel Permit for travel between Dubai, UAE and Melbourne, AUS                          |                                                                                                                                                                                                                |
| 4/01/22  | Djokovic announces medical exemption on social media                                                                                        | https://www.instagram.com/p/CYTe9fer_1K/                                                                                                                                                                       |
| 5/01/22  | Tennis Australia and the Victorian Government holds press conference to explain the medical exemption process                               | https://twitter.com/9NewsAUS/status/14785039 98051160065                                                                                                                                                       |
|          | Prime Minister Scott Morrison answers question about Djokovic exemption                                                                     | https://pmtranscripts.pmc.gov.au/release/transcr ipt-43738                                                                                                                                                     |
|          | HomeMinister Karen Andrews releases statement that 'border rules apply to everyone'                                                         | https://minister.homeaffairs.gov.au/KarenAndre ws/Pages/australias-border-rules-apply-to- everyone.aspx                                                                                                        |
|          | Djokovic arrives at Melbourne Airport and is escorted to passport control                                                                   | https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_ file/0019/95050/Affidavit-of-Novak-Djokovic- sworn-on-10-January-2022.pdf                                                                                       |
| 6/01/22  | Australian Border Force officer questions Djokovic overnight at airport; Djokovic transferred to immigration detention hotel                | https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_ file/0004/95053/Parties-jointly-agreed- Transcript-of-Interviews-conducted-by-the- ABF.pdf                                                                      |
|          | Djokovic's lawyers apply for remedy from Federal Circuit and Family Court                                                                   | https://www.fcfcoa.gov.au/sites/default/files/20 22-01/MLG35-of-2022-Application.pdf                                                                                                                           |
| 7/01/22  | Renata Voráčová and Filip Serdarušić detained by ABF & visa cancelled , (both had entered AUS with the same medical exemption as Djokovic); | https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2022/jan/07 /czech-doubles-specialist-voracova-joins- djokovic-in-detention-amid-vaccine-row- tennis-australian-open                                                         |
|          |                                                                                                                                             | https://www.iol.co.za/sport/tennis/australian- open/croatian-tennis-coach-leaves-australia- over-visa-016f7e75-2ec0-431b-8f8b- 3854bd18fcfb                                                                    |
| 8/01/22  | Government lawyers apply for hearing to be pushed back two days (refused by judge)                                                          | https://www.fcfcoa.gov.au/sites/default/files/20 22- 01/20220108%20Application%20in%20a%20p roceeding%2022000117%20- %20NW%20CT.pdf                                                                            |
|          | An official voluntarily left the country because they did not meet Australian government visa requirements                                  | https://www.theage.com.au/sport/tennis/we- need-them-tennis-australia-pleaded-for- vaccine-exemption-for-players-20220108- p59mqu.html                                                                         |
| 10/01/22 | Hearing: Djokovic vs Minister for Home Affairs Judge Kelly of FCFC quashes visa cancellation                                                | https://www.fcfcoa.gov.au/migration- law/online-file/djokovic https://youtu.be/zs3yTm-ZTz4 https://youtu.be/MmCwOEBDonc https://youtu.be/3pn5jlF3Uyg https://youtu.be/Ok3iL2KGcog https://youtu.be/FfYEp1PUSt4 |
|          | Djokovic released from detention, ATP issues a statement on the case                                                                        | https://www.atptour.com/en/news/djokovic-atp- statement-2022                                                                                                                                                   |
| 12/01/22 | Djokovic posts statement with details about his mid- December activities                                                                    | https://www.instagram.com/p/CYnO7cDqbdj/? utm_medium=copy_link                                                                                                                                                 |
| 13/01/22 | Australian Open draw ceremony                                                                                                               |                                                                                                                                                                                                                |
| 14/01/22 | 5:30pm, Immigration Minister Alex Hawke announces decision to use personal powers to cancel Djokovic visa                                   | https://minister.homeaffairs.gov.au/AlexHawke /Pages/statement-regarding-mr-novak- djokovic.aspx                                                                                                               |
|          | Djokovic applies for judicial review of the Minister's decision, granted interim relief pending resolution                                  | https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_ file/0006/95235/Originating-Application- sealed.pdf                                                                                                             |
| 15/01/22 | Judge Kelly orders transfer of the case to Federal Court                                                                                    | https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/services/access-to- files-and-transcripts/fcfcoa/djokovic/Judgment- 2022-FedCFamC2G-7.pdf                                                                                          |

Table 1 Timeline of events and documentation

| 16/01/22   | Hearing before 3-member Federal Court panel, Djokovic vs Minister for Immigration   | https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/services/access-to- files-and-transcripts/online-files/djokovic           |
|------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|            | ATP releases statement on the visa cancellation                                     | https://www.atptour.com/en/news/atp- statement-on-novak-djokovic-visa-appeal- decision                |
|            | Djokovic deported and 3-year re-entry ban imposed                                   | https://www.atptour.com/en/news/atp- statement-on-novak-djokovic-visa-appeal- decision                |
| 17/01/22   | Main draw of the Australian Open begins                                             |                                                                                                       |
|            | Federal Court panel releases reasons for Djokovic judgment                          | https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgme nts/Judgments/fca/full/2022/2022fcafc0003                |
| 15/02/22   | Amol Rajan interiews Djokovic for BBC                                               | https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m0014z dm/amol-rajan-interviews-novak-djokovic                  |
| 21/02/22   | Australian border opens to all vaccinated foreign travellers                        | https://www.npr.org/2022/02/21/1082067920/a ustralia-reopens-its-borders-to-international- visitors   |
|            | BBC issues a statement defending its broadcasting its Djokovic interview            | https://tennishead.net/bbc-issue-statement- defending-djokovic-interview-amid-heavy- complaints/      |
| 17/11/22   | Andrew Giles MP revokes Djokovic's visa cancellation so he can play AO2023          | https://minister.homeaffairs.gov.au/AndrewGile s/Pages/statement-regarding-mr-djokovic- 15112022.aspx |

## 3. Appraisal Framework

Appraisal is a system of classifying the resources deployed to express evaluation. It is situated within the Interpersonal Metafunction of Systemic Function Linguistics (Halliday, 1985). It is also a system of meanings for evaluation and a description of resources for evaluation (Martin, 2017; Martin & White 2005). Appraisal investigates the subjectivity within communication, how we evaluate communication, and express emotions. The three classifications are Attitude, Engagement, and Graduation.

Attitude can be considered as 'ways of feeling', emotion, ethics, and aesthetics (Martin & White, 2005), and is classified into Affect, Judgement, and Appreciation. Affect delineates emotional reactions (unhappy, jolly, nervous). Judgement refers to assessment according to moral and legal values (nice, authoritative, dishonest). Appreciation deals with evaluation from the perspective of aesthetics. Attitude is generally realised adjectivally. All categories have positive and negative manifestations, which are employed to align readers to writers' opinions.

Engagement  deals  with  the  alignment  of  commitment.  There  is  a  distinction  between  dialogic (heterogloss)  and  non-dialogic  (monogloss)  statements.  Monogloss  have  stand-alone  statements unrelated to other statements which usually pre-suppose beliefs or facts. Through heterogloss, people play with and engage with ideas through an increase in the dialogic space. A person can either entertain a proposition by acknowledging their own subjectivity or they can attribute it to someone else. These positions have the same effect of acknowledging alternative viewpoints. On the other hand, the dialogic space can be contracted by denying non-aligning viewpoints by disclaiming (negating or countering) or proclaiming  (making  a  strong  affirmation).  Heterogloss  is  pertinent  in  the  investigation  of  how individuals subscribe or do not subscribe to a 'community of shared value and belief' (Martin & White, 2005, pp. 95).

Graduation has two classifications, force (the intensity of an evaluation) and focus (the sharpening or strengthening of the typicality of an evaluation). The role of graduation is mostly rhetorical.

Appraisal has been employed to investigate a wide range of texts including political discourse and news stories (White, 2002, 2003, 2016) and casual conversation (Eggins & Slade, 1997). This study draws on Fuoli's (2018) work which presents a detailed method for Appraisal annotation. Appraisal can be considered as being subjective, because the interpretation is context based (Hommerberg & Don, 2015;  Thompson,  2014).  Fuoli  deals  with  this  issue  through  developing  annotation  techniques. Appraisal has already been applied to computer-mediated communication to investigate how users form short-lived communities based on common affinities (Zappavigna, 2011). The present study builds on these  aforementioned  Appraisal  developments  to  investigate  the  discourse  dynamics  that  emerged within the public space relating to the 2022 Australian Open.

## 3.1 Visual Appraisal (Static texts)

A classification for visual Appraisal has been proposed by Economou (2009) and White (2014). Their four aspects help identify inscription or invocation : (a) the author's subjective presence in the text as the agent in attitudinal meaning; (b) the stability of the attitudinal meanings across multiple contexts of use; (c) the reader as giver of interpretations or inferences; (d) the pressure on the negotiating terms of author-reader solidarity created by the expression.

The attitudinal potential of images according to their compositional properties may invoke attitude via different mechanisms (Economou 2008, 2009). According to Economou, they ' afford' , ' flag' and ' provoke' attitudinal assessments via inference, implication, association and suggestion. Images also often work together with verbal text. The attitudinal effect is the product of: the context in which the image is placed; a specific transcoding of the image; a specific verbal organisation of what is portrayed.

## 3.2 Paralanguage and Appraisal

In paralanguage, textual meaning corresponds approximately to beats and pointing/deictics; ideational and interpersonal meaning encompasses both iconic and metaphoric gestures. Ideational gestures would be  what  Kendon  (2004)  terms  representational;  interpersonal  and  textual  functions  would  cover Kendon's pragmatic gestures. This study relies  on Martin and  Zappavigna's  2019  work  which  has various consequences for models of paralanguage and Appraisal, and they make useful distinctions between paralanguage and behaviour, separating semiosis and non-semiotic behaviour (somasis),.

Somasis draws on Halliday's evolutionary classification of systems (Halliday 1996) with four levels of complexity. Physical activity corresponds to material action with some change in the relationship between  physical  entities  (skipping,  leaping,  chopping,  tugging  etc.).  Biological  behaviour  is  split between  changes  that  reinstate  comfort  (laughing,  sneezing,  itching,  etc.)  and  those  of  discomfort (crying, fiddling, squirming, trembling, etc.). Social communion is split between mutual perception (touch, smell, sharing gaze, pitch, proximity, etc.) and reciprocal attachment (hand holding, cuddling, tickling, caressing, kissing, copulating etc.).

Another important distinction is between sonovergent and semovergent paralanguage. Paralanguage that  is  sonovergent  comes together  with the prosodic  phonology of spoken language (Halliday and Greaves 2008). Interpersonally, it deals with voice tone and a part of the body (e.g. forehead or hands) moving in tune with pitch movement. From a textual perspective it involves a body part beating in time with speech, maybe beats in unison with a syllable, or a gesture with a tone group.

Semovergent paralanguage is gesture aligning with meaning or the lexicogrammar and language. Textual body language can be considered 'deictic', corresponding to both identification and also to periodicity. Ideational paralanguage can be considered 'mimetic', compatible with both connexion and ideation. Interpersonal paralanguage can be considered 'expressive', associated both with negotiation and also Appraisal.

Paralanguage  that  is  semovergent  potentially  corresponds  with  Appraisal  resources  through hand/arm position, facial expression, muscle tension, bodily stance and motion as well as voice quality (Ngo 2018). Interpersonally, spoken language inscribes attitudes, grades qualities and positions voices other  than  the  speaker's  own.  Speakers  can  exchange  feelings,  greetings,  information,  goods  and services in dialogue. Paralanguage can only enact emotion, spoken language has the potential to make different attitudes explicit (emotional reactions, judgements of character and appreciation of things). As outlined by Martin and White (2005) attitude may not be explicitly inscribed in language, but invoked by ideational choices a speaker expects a reaction to. The extent of hand shapes and hand/arm motion can support graded language to form Graduation, Hao and Hood (2019) also mention de-centering postures to soften focus. Hand positions also support the expansion and contraction of heteroglossia, supine hands opening up dialogism and prone hands closing it, thus forming Engagement. Ngo et.al. 2021 develop a very useful model for paralanguage focussing on Facial Affect and Voice Affect.

## 4. Data and methods

A corpus of multimodal texts (Kress and van Leeuwen 2001; Querol-Julián and Fortanet 2012) was compiled consisting of the aforementioned documents and other texts produced during the period of most intense media coverage from 04/01/2021 to 15/02/2021. Texts were collected, sorted and chosen at random from various media and media sites and can be considered representative. Table 2 provides a  summary of the corpus which included official statements (written and video), press conferences (live/recorded) and press releases (written) by individuals and institutions involved (including Tweets and Instagram posts); official legal documents; videos of legal proceedings; news reports (written and video); and dedicated forums following the trials in real time (YouTube channels).  An expanded view of the corpus is shown in Figure 1 of the Appendix

.

Table 2 Summary of Corpus

| News articles                                                  | no. of texts                      | 4                     |
|----------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------|-----------------------|
|                                                                | total no. of words                | 4114                  |
|                                                                | no. of photos                     | 8                     |
| News video                                                     | No. of texts                      | 4                     |
|                                                                | Total duration                    | 14 minutes 46 seconds |
| Live video statement / Interview Press conference              | no. of texts                      | 6                     |
|                                                                | total duration                    | 01:41:36              |
| Written statement / Press release corpus / Instagram statement | no. of texts                      | 8                     |
|                                                                | no. of words                      | 2940                  |
|                                                                | no. of photos                     | 6                     |
| Trial video                                                    | no. of texts                      | 1                     |
|                                                                | total duration                    | 04:01:59              |
| Trial documents                                                | no. of texts                      | 9                     |
|                                                                | Total no. of words                | 28116                 |
| Trial commentary                                               | no. of texts                      | 4                     |
|                                                                | total duration                    | 21 hours 34 minutes   |
|                                                                | average no. of comments per video | 338                   |

This corpus was annotated manually for multimodal Appraisal, as described above, including photos, images and paralanguage. This was done through the development of a carefully designed annotation approach and with the help of trained students. The texts in the corpus can be considered as collections of language and communication in context and can be considered suitable for corpus-based multimodal discourse analysis (O'Halloran 2011, Norris 2019, Baldry & Kantz 2022). Defining a unit of analysis for multimodal texts within the Appraisal system was a major challenge. To resolve this problem we used a system of sequencing based on the notion of clusters (Baldry & Thibault 2006. pp31). The term cluster refers to the local groupings of items, be they words, sounds, images or video frames. Then emphasis was given to minimality and contextuality, as described by Cavasso and Taboada (2021). 'The principle of minimality means that the item to be annotated (cluster-span) should be as short as possible, while at the same time including all the words that convey Attitude. Context dependence involves using all information available to understand the meaning of the evaluative expression under consideration'

Although Appraisal is a framework, labelling can be subjective as interpretation is necessary, so a system  of  reliability  tests  was  carried  out  on  annotated  texts  based  on  Fuoli's  (2018)  method  but modified for multimodal annotation. A predefined procedure was followed, which ensured consistency and reduced subjectivity, with guidelines on how to identify and classify the different components of the Appraisal system. Explicit criteria for annotation were established, providing a clear framework for evaluative judgments. Specific features were defined that indicate different types of evaluations, making the annotation process more objective and systematic. Annotators went through an induction process to align their understanding of the criteria and achieve consensus in their annotations, not dissimilar to the process of 'rolling-translation' in multi-translator projects (Komninos 2011), with regular feedback and discussion among annotators to address uncertainties or disagreements. This collaborative approach allowed  for  a  shared  understanding  of  the  annotation  criteria  and  promotes  consistency  in  the interpretation of evaluative language.

## 5. Analysis

This is presenting findings from a work in progress, it is worth publishing the preliminary results as the framework enables the distinction  of  discourse  dynamics,  values,  beliefs  and  evaluations,  mapping these discourses that are key in shaping public understanding. Preliminary results demonstrate how evaluative language contributes to community-building and helps to identify the underlying values, beliefs, and evaluations that shape the emotional, cognitive, and behavioural responses of the various stakeholders involved can be reported. It is interesting to focus on: Attitude analysis to see how Affect, Judgement and Appreciation were distributed and their Polarity (positive, negative, neutral); the nature of the multimodal communication to frame or reinforce opinions and values; Engagement, specifically the frequency and distribution of monogloss and heterogloss communication in various texts.

Looking at the language (not multimodal) corpus as a whole, the number of cluster-spans of each Attitude label and their polarity is shown in Table 3. Negative cluster-spans are very frequent, making up 82.3% of Attitude. Positive cluster-spans make up 15%, a majority of the remainder of the clusterspans with only 1% of labelled spans being Neutral. Regarding Attitude labels, there was higher rate of Judgment at 67%, with Appreciation being favoured at 22% over Affect at 11%.  Judgement refers to assessment according to moral and legal values (nice, authoritative, dishonest).

Table 3 Attitude spans as percentages

|             | Affect   | Judgement   | Appreciation   | Total   |
|-------------|----------|-------------|----------------|---------|
| Total Spans | 11%      | 67%         | 22%            | 100%    |
| Negative    | 79%      | 91%         | 77%            | 82%     |
| Positive    | 19%      | 8%          | 17%            | 15%     |
| Neutral     | 2%       | 1%          | 6%             | 3%      |

The overwhelmingly high level of the use of Judgement, 67%, suggests that rather than employing Appreciation, and even less so Affect, the subjects in this corpus conveyed opinion through Judgement. It would suggest that opinion, that would normally be associated with Affect ( I think Djokovic should be punished , I  am outraged by Djokovic ) is being communicated through Judgement ( Djokovic is a criminal, Djokovic gets what he deserves ) or to a lesser extent through Appreciation ( This state of affairs is  madness ).  This can be considered a significant finding and suggests that there needs to be some reorganisation in labelling as Appreciation is essentially being communicated through Judgement. The data shows an overall consistency in Polarity over the corpus with Positivity being slightly favoured by Affect and Appreciation, and Negativity being overwhelmingly associated with Judgement.

It is interesting to report what text-types employed which semiotic resources to which participants. Analysis took place according to (in the case of static images) inscription or invocation : (a) the author's subjective presence in the text as the agent in attitudinal meaning; (b) the stability of the attitudinal meanings across multiple contexts of use; (c) the reader as giver of interpretations or inferences; (d) the pressure  on  the  negotiating  terms  of  author-reader  solidarity  created  by  the  expression.  Also  the attitudinal properties of ' afford' , ' flag' and ' provoke' were analysed .

Where  video  material  was  present,  Paralanguage  Affect  was  analysed  according  to  Attitude, Graduation and Engagement through Facial Affect, Voice Affect and body movement (Ngo et al. 2021). Facial  Affect,  hand  shapes  and  hand/arm  motion  support  graded  language  to  form  Graduation. Engagement in body movement and gesture can be de-centering postures to soften focus, hand positions supporting the expansion and contraction of heterogloss, supine hands opening up dialogism and prone hands  closing  it.  Voice  Affect  especially  voice  quality,  can  support  Attitude,  Graduation  and Engagement.

To carry out this analysis, the spans of the different semiotic resources were separated and analysed to see if they reinforced, contradicted or were neutral with each other. So far, the data shows that the institutional communications coming from the Australian Government, Victoria Officials and Tennis Australia used little to no heterogloss, neither in the choices of text types (statements, press releases etc.)  nor in their utterances. The data also suggests that in news articles there is more heterogloss than the institutional communication but less heterogloss than the other communication types in this corpus. Moreover, in the news articles sub-corpus, the images invoked emotion and opinion essentially acting as an intensifier of the accompanying text, and an intensifier of emotion or opinion. For example, all the news articles, even when the headline was not about Djokovic, carried pictures of Djokovic, usually shown in a mid-shot grimace. In paralanguage analysis, the Facial Affect and implied Voice Affect of this image is very aggressive, conflictual and monogloss. In 83% of the cases where images were used in news articles, the pictures invoked emotion and opinion. This interpretation of the pictures could be subjective, but is less of an issue, as this is an integral part of this framework. Indeed,  the large corpus investigated through this mixed methods approach offers a reliable and valid method for interpretation. Tennis is not dissimilar to a combat sport but without the physical contact. The world knows Djokovic for his tennis. However, 83% of use of Djokovic's image in news articles used images with the intense emotions, effort and competition of the tennis match, at the most extreme moment of energy exertion and transferred that to the vaccine saga context, even when incoherent with the subject of the headline. They did  not  show  images  of  Djokovic  receiving  trophies,  nor  shaking  hands  with  opponents  and umpires  and  so  on.  By  implication  the  extension  of  the  tennis  match  context  (win-lose,  beat  with strength and skill) was transferred to the relationship between Australian officials and Djokovic. It could be said to have increased the sense of conflict between these participants and the tension amongst the followers that were forming around them. This sense of tension and conflict had never been reported in Djokovic's more than ten previous trips to the Australian Open, and also did not seem present when he walked on the plane with the official exemption allowing him to play. In all these situations, there is a context of cooperation with the Australian and tennis authorities and not conflict nor tension.

This  stands  in  contrast  to  the  video  material  where  Paralanguage  Affect  was  employed  to  both mitigate and increase intensity of emotion or opinion. In the material analysed, it emerges that Facial Affect and Voice Quality as well as body movement are far more contradictory to or neutral with the accompanying speech, whereas static images enhance the opinions and emotions of conflict in the accompanying text. The discourse surrounding the Australian Open saga exhibited a range of emotional tones, including anger, frustration, sympathy, and support. These emotions were expressed through language, paralanguage (including sonovergent and semovergent semiosis), and visuals, influencing the interpretation of the events. Anger and frustration were often expressed through the use of strong and negative  adjectives,  such  as  "outrageous,"  "unfair,"  or  "ridiculous".  Verbs  associated  with  these emotions,  such  as  "condemn,"  "protest,"  or  "demand,"  were  employed.  Anger  and  frustration  was expressed through vocal cues such as raised voices, harsh tones, or passionate speech (sonovergent paralanguage).  This  conveyed  a  sense  of  intensity  (Graduation)  and  frustration.  Gestures,  body language, and facial expressions displayed signs of anger, such as clenched fists, aggressive postures, or furrowed brows. Images or videos captured tense or confrontational moments, protests, or passionate expressions of dissent. Infographics or cartoons employed symbolism or exaggerated visuals to amplify emotions.  Anger  and  frustration  contributed  to  the  perception  of  injustice  or  mistreatment.  They galvanised  support  for  Djokovic,  fuelling  criticism  of  the  Australian  government.  However,  the preliminary results suggest that, the greater the heterogloss of the text the more the Paralanguage Affect mitigated rather than intensified this emotion and opinion.

Sympathy and support were expressed through positive adjectives, such as "brave," "courageous," or "determined." Expressions of empathy and understanding were common. Verbs related to support, like "defend," "stand by," or "rally," were employed. Quotes from Djokovic's supporters or personal anecdotes were included to elicit emotional connection. Sympathy and support was conveyed through compassionate and empathetic vocal cues, such as gentle tones  or  comforting speech  (sonovergent paralanguage). Non-verbal cues, such as nodding, smiling, or gestures of solidarity, indicated sympathy and support. Visuals depicted Djokovic in a positive light, showcasing his achievements, philanthropic work,  or  interactions  with  fans.  Images  of  his  emotional  state,  such  as  disappointment  or  distress, evoked sympathy. Sympathy and support evoked a sense of solidarity and loyalty among fans and contributed to the perception of Djokovic as a victim. This emotional tone strengthened the narrative of unfair treatment towards Djokovic and challenged the actions of the Australian government.

As has already been stated, heterogloss is pertinent in the investigation of how individuals subscribe or do not subscribe to a 'community of shared value and belief' (Martin & White, 2005). The protocols for this type of analysis considered the texts as units and assigned participants (participant 1, participant 2  and  possible  other  participants),  and  then  considered  monogloss,  heterogloss  and  the  extent  of heterogloss i.e. open synchronous, open asynchronous, restricted synchronous, restricted asynchronous. Here 'restricted' can indicate that either the participants allowed into the discussion were chosen/restricted (i.e. not open), or there was a hierarchy within the multimodality of discussion, i.e. one participant(s) had a greater-range of multimodal recourses available for communication, whereas the other participant had a restricted use of multimodal recourses.

Interesting to note is that out of the 36 texts analysed, three text-types (23/36 texts) can be identified as being monogloss: video statements, written statements and trial documents. These all come from authoritative participants (ministers of parliament, tennis authorities and courts of justice) and can be seen as informing the public on decisions made by authorities. Out of the four heterogloss texts, there are varying levels of heterogloss, also depending on the participant. For example, the trial video has many participants  and  the  different  participants  have  different  levels  of  heterogloss:  the  judge  and lawyers,  Djokovic  and  the  wider  public  (Melbourne  citizens,  tennis  enthusiasts,  global  community inflicted  by  Covid-19  and  the  subsequent  restrictions).  The  judge  and  lawyers  can  be  considered participants that have synchronous interaction using the full range of semiotic resources within the parameters of Melbourne court proceedings. However, on account of a highly institutionalised context of courtroom interaction, Djokovic could participate to a much lesser extent than the judge and the lawyers. He is not a legal expert, nor was he familiar with Melbourne court practices and he is not a native  English  speaker.  His  participation  is  effectively  reduced  to  little  more  than  the  object  of discussion rather than a participant of the discussion and is akin to the wider public, who also have a vested interested in the debate (Goffman 1981). Neither the wider public nor Djokovic can participate in  the  trial  discussion,  they  can  only  observe  it.  Therefore,  this  text  is  heteroloss  for  restricted participants but monogloss for the Djokovic and the wider-public. Out of the 36 texts analysed, there was no instance of open synchronous discussion with symmetrical multimodal resources. The trial had restricted  participation,  the  trial  video  commentaries  had  open  synchronous  discussion  but  with  a significant asymmetric distribution of semiotic resources between the commentary organisers, who had the full range of semiotic resources and other participants who could only send typed comments and emojis/images/gifs. 23 texts were monogloss (24 if you include the trial video), the remaining were restricted heterogloss. In terms of symmetry of multimodal recourses, only the trial had a symmetry between participants, but only for the highly restricted participants of the judge and lawyers.

## 6. Discussion

Different  actors  have  employed  various  linguistic,  paralinguistic  and  visual  discursive  strategies  to shape the meaning and interpretation of the events. Multimodal Appraisal Analysis of discourse helps understand how evaluative language and communication strategies contribute to community-building and to identify the underlying values, beliefs, and evaluations that shape the emotional, cognitive, and behavioural responses of the various stakeholders in a specific event. Multimodal Appraisal analysis can help identify specific strategies and its application to a corpora can detect layered patterns that emerge. Looking at the same corpus of texts, in this manner, can also form a discourse analysis that informs on how the discourse evolved and developed.

As has already been stated, the Australian authorities employed legal and bureaucratic systems and language to emphasise the strict application of visa rules and Covid-19 protocols. The use of monogloss ways of communication, informing the public on decisions, reinforced their authority by framing their opinion as not being subject to discussion. This framing also projected the government as upholding the law and protecting public health. The use of monogloss communication through official statements, mostly written and some press conferences (restricted heterogloss), scaffolds the asymmetrical power and  communicative  relationship  between  authority  and  public.  This  discourse  strategy  employed monological strategies that also incorporated nationalistic rhetoric, highlighting Australia's sovereignty and the need to protect its borders and citizens. This framing appealed to patriotic sentiments and a sense  of  unity  among  the  public,  but  did  little  to  democratise  opinion  building  and  bottom-up communication. The presence of government officials in official settings, such as press conferences or briefings, further reinforced this sense of authority. This was supported by the use of other semiotic resources which included ministers or healthcare officials in suits, delivering official statements and few other forms of communication.

Fewer texts in the corpus focussed on Djokovic's individual rights. These focussed on the argument that he should be allowed to participate in the tournament based on his vaccination exemption status. These texts framed the issue as a matter of personal freedom and choice. In these texts he was portrayed as  a  victim  of  unfair  treatment  and  persecution,  highlighting  the  perceived  inconsistencies  in  the application  of  Covid-19  protocols.  Language  that  evokes  emotions  such  as  empathy,  sympathy,  or admiration  for  Djokovic  was  employed  with  far  greater  use  of  semiotic  resources  and  with  less asymmetry in the power and communicative hierarchy. Often these texts included personal anecdotes, emotional narratives, or passionate expressions connecting with the audience on an emotional level. Hashtags, viral posts, and social media campaigns were employed to mobilise and rally support. These strategies tapped the power of online communities and networks to amplify their message and garner attention.  These  strategies  were  not  employed  by  the  authorities,  but  their  supporters  did.  Slogans, images, gifs, and symbols representing solidarity or support were prolific. Videos and photos of fans, banners, or demonstrations of support were often present.

A  sensationalist  approach  marked  a  number  of  the  texts,  emphasising  controversy,  drama,  and personal  narratives.  This  strategy  attracted  attention  and  generated  public  interest,  often  leading  to polarised interpretations. Different aspects of the story, such as Djokovic's alleged rule-breaking or the government's handling of the situation were focussed on with accompanying use of static images or generally mitigating use of paralanguage. The narrative was shaped by selectively highlighting specific aspects of the events. Images were selected that aligned with the stance or that evoked specific emotions. Ultimately, these discursive strategies employed by the different actors played a significant role in shaping the public discourse, framing the narrative, and influencing public opinion regarding this issue.

The use of legal discourse by the Australian government positioned them as guardians of public health and the rule of law. The nationalistic rhetoric appealed to a sense of patriotism and justified strict border control measures. On the other hand, human rights discourse and victim narratives portrayed Djokovic as an individual fighting for his rights and freedom. They highlighted his achievements, talent, and  perseverance.  Language  included positive adjectives,  such  as  "great,"  "resilient,"  and  "heroic." Paralanguage involved passionate  speeches  or emotional statements.  Visuals showcased  Djokovic's successes, his humanitarian work, or his interactions with fans. The implication was that Djokovic was a victim of unjust treatment and worthy of sympathy and support.

These evaluative stances are conveyed through language choices, paralinguistic choices, as well as through visual representations in the media. The use of positive or negative language and imagery evoked specific emotions, shaped public perception, and influenced public opinion. The implications of  these  stances  was  significant.  Supportive  stances  towards  Djokovic  rallied  public  support  and sympathy,  shaping  public  opinion  in  his  favour.  On  the  other  hand,  critical  stances  undermined Djokovic's reputation and credibility, impacting public perception of him. Supportive stances towards the Australian government bolstered confidence in their decision-making and justified strict measures. However, critical stances eroded trust, fuelled public dissent, and lead to calls for accountability or policy changes. Ultimately, the evaluative stances expressed by different actors played a crucial role in shaping the public discourse, determining the level of support or opposition, and influencing the overall narrative surrounding Djokovic and the Australian government.

Actors with different ideological positions were involved (Djokovic, Australian authorities, lawyers, journalists, wider public), and their perspectives were expressed through language, paralanguage and visuals. It is important to note that individuals' ideological positions can vary within different groups. The  Australian  government  emphasised  the  importance  of  public  health  and  safety  as  its  primary ideological position. Djokovic's supporters often advocated for individual freedom and personal rights. Media outlets generally position themselves within the framework of journalism ethics and the public interest.  Language  used  emphasised  objective  reporting,  balance,  and  transparency  scaffolded  with visuals including press conferences, newsrooms, or journalists in action. The implication was that the media's ideological position is to provide accurate information, facilitate public discourse, and hold power to account. The implications of these ideological positions within the wider social and political context  were  significant.  Although  not  covered  in  the  findings  section,  the  clash  between  the government's focus on public health versus the individual rights advocated by Djokovic's supporters reflected  broader  debates  around  the  balance  between  public  safety  and  personal  freedoms.  These ideological  positions  intersected  with  political  ideologies  such  as  liberalism,  conservatism,  or libertarianism, which shape public opinion and influence policy-making. The discourse surrounding the Australian  Open  saga  also  highlighted  broader  societal  divisions  and  ideological  polarisation.  It revealed  the  tension  between  collective  responsibility  and  individual  rights,  highlighting  ongoing debates about the appropriate limits of state power and individual autonomy.

Additionally, the media's adherence to journalism ethics and the pursuit of the public interest has implications for media credibility, trust, and its role in shaping public opinion. The way media outlets represent different ideological positions can influence public discourse and perceptions of the events. Overall,  the  ideological  positions  expressed,  reflect  broader  social  and  political  contexts,  sparking discussions about the relationship between public health, individual rights, media ethics, and the balance of power in society.

In the more than ten years previous to the 2022 Australian Open, Djokovic had gone to Melbourne with a sense of cooperation with the authorities to participate in the tennis competition. The Minister's motivation for cancelling his visa was not because of what Djokovic had done but how the Australian people may perceive his views on vaccination. Whether his views aligned with how his views were perceived by Australian people or not, was not important. Perception of Djokovic's views seems to be more influenced by the discourse and the multimodal organisation of that discourse, rather than based on  Djokovic's  statements  and  actions.  The  analysis  of  this  corpus  showed  that  the  conflictual relationship between Djokovic and the Australian authorities, during the period under investigation, was fed by the use of images of Djokovic in news articles transferring the dynamics of the tennis match to this context. In reality, Djokovic had approached this issue with the same collaborative approach as his more than ten previous visits to the Australia Open and his subsequent appearance in 2023.

## 7. Conclusion

The multimodal appraisal discourse analysis of the 2022 Australian Open sheds light on the intricate interplay of language, paralanguage, and visual  communication.  This  verbal  and non-verbal communication contributes to shaping public understanding and sentiment. The current study holds significant  implications  for  the  comprehension  of  how  discursive  dynamics,  values,  beliefs,  and evaluations  influence  collective  perception  and  engagement.  The  Appraisal  Theory  framework presented in section 3 and the analysis methods in section 4 offer a valuable lens through which to distinguish and map these intricate discourses. This facilitates a deeper exploration of the multifaceted dimensions that shape public discourse and these frameworks and methods can be replicated by other researchers in other contexts.

The preliminary results underscore the pivotal role of evaluative language in community-building. It  also highlights its capacity to reveal underlying values, beliefs, and evaluations that influence the cognitive,  emotional,  and  behavioural  responses.  Attitude  analysis  revealed  a  predominant  use  of Judgement, this suggests that opinions (typically associated with Affect or Appreciation) are conveyed through the prism of moral and legal assessment. This key finding highlights the need for nuanced labelling and demonstrates the intricate interplay of emotions and opinions within the discourse.

The study investigates the nature of multimodal communication, demonstrating the distribution and role of semiotic resources within different text types. Notably, the institutional communications from the  Australian  Government  and  other  authoritative  bodies  primarily  employ  monogloss  strategies, reinforcing their position through authoritative language and official contexts. Whereas news articles, a significant source of public information, display varying degrees of heterogloss, suggesting a more diverse  range  of  voices  and  perspectives.  Heterogloss  discussions  are restricted,  and their levels  of symmetry  vary,  indicating  the  differential  participation  of  stakeholders.  The  absence  of  fully symmetrical  multimodal  discussions  suggests  a  complex  negotiation  of  power,  identity,  and  voice within the discourse.

Paralanguage, a crucial element of communication, is pivotal in influencing emotional tones and perceptions. The analysis of paralanguage, including Facial Affect, Voice Quality, and body movement, highlights how emotions are both amplified and mitigated through different channels. Static images tend to intensify emotions, whereas video materials often convey a contradictory or neutral emotional stance, indicating the complex relationship between spoken and non-verbal cues.

In the broader context, this analysis provides valuable insights into the communication strategies employed by different actors, within societal divisions and ideological polarisation. The clash between collective responsibility and individual rights reflects broader debates about the balance between public safety and personal freedoms. This echoes the political ideologies framing the discourse and shapes public opinion. Furthermore, the media's role in representing different ideological positions influences public discourse, credibility, and trust, underscoring the importance of responsible journalism and its impact on societal perceptions.

The multimodal appraisal analysis of the discourse around the 2022 Australian Tennis Open offers a rich tapestry of language, paralanguage, and visual communication, revealing the complex interplay of  emotions,  opinions,  and  values.  The  preliminary  findings  of this  study  provide  a  foundation  for deeper exploration, inviting further research into the intricate dynamics that shape public understanding, sentiment, and the broader societal implications that underpin such narratives. As discourse continues to be a powerful force in shaping collective consciousness, this analysis reinforces the significance of understanding the intricate layers that contribute to the formation of public perception and identity.

## 8. References

- Baldry, A., & Kantz, D. (2022). Corpus-assisted approaches to online multimodal discourse analysis of videos. Analysing Multimodality in Specialized Discourse Settings: Innovative Research Methods and Applications , 1-22.
- Baldry, A., & Thibault, P. J. (2006). Multimodal transcription and text analysis: A multimedia toolkit and coursebook (p. 4). London: Equinox.

Cavasso, L., & Taboada, M. (2021). A corpus analysis of online news comments using the Appraisal framework. Journal of Corpora and Discourse Studies , 4 , 1-38.

Drasovean, A., & Tagg, C. (2015). Evaluative language and its solidarity-building role on TED. com: An appraisal and corpus analysis. Language@ Internet , 12 .

- Economou, D. (2008) 'Pulling readers in: news photos in Greek and Australian broadsheets.' in Communicating conflict: Multilingual case studies of the news media , E. Thomson and P. R. R. White (ed.), London: Continuum, 253-80.
- Economou, D. (2009) Photos in the News: appraisal analysis of visual semiosis and verbal-visual intersemiosis , Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Sydney.

Eggins, S., & Slade, D. (2004). Analysing casual conversation . Equinox Publishing Ltd..

Federal Court of Australia. (2022a). Novak Djokovic applicant minister for home affairs.

[https://fedcourt.gov.au/\_\_data/assets/pdf\_file/0009/95058/Order-Djokovic-v-Minister-MLG35-of-2022\_10-January2022-003.pdf](https://fedcourt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/95058/Order-Djokovic-v-Minister-MLG35-of-2022_10-January-2022-003.pdf)

Federal Court of Australia. (2022b). Djokovic affidavit.

[https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/\_\_data/assets/pdf\_file/0019/95050/Affidavit-of-Novak-Djokovic-sworn-on-10-January2022.pdf](https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/95050/Affidavit-of-Novak-Djokovic-sworn-on-10-January-2022.pdf)

Federal Court of Australia. (2022c). Djokovic court filing.

[https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/\_\_data/assets/pdf\_file/0007/95236/Sealed-Affidavit-Bannister-1512022.pdf](https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/95236/Sealed-Affidavit-Bannister-1512022.pdf)

Federal  Court of  Australia.  (2022d).  Djokovic v  minister  for  immigration,  citizenship,  migrant  services  and  multicultural affairs [2022] FCAFC 3

[https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/full/2022/2022fcafc0003](https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/full/2022/2022fcafc0003)

- Federal Court of Australia. (2022e). Applicant's outline of submissions.

[https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/\_\_data/assets/pdf\_file/0005/95243/sealed-Applicants-revised-Submissions-1512022.pdf](https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/95243/sealed-Applicants-revised-Submissions-1512022.pdf)

Federal  Court  of  Australia.  (2022f).  Djokovic  v  minister  for  immigration,  citizenship,  migrant  services  and  multicultural affairs.

https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/services/access-to-files-and-transcripts/fcfcoa/djokovic/Judgment-2022-FedCFamC2G7.pdf

Federal Court of Australia (2022g) Notice of Filing VID17/2022

[https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/\_\_data/assets/pdf\_file/0005/95243/sealed-Applicants-revised-Submissions-1512022.pdf](https://www.fedcourt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/95243/sealed-Applicants-revised-Submissions-1512022.pdf)

Fuoli, M. (2018). A stepwise method for annotating APPRAISAL. Functions of Language , 25 (2), 229-258.

Goffman, E. (1981). Forms of talk . University of Pennsylvania Press.

Halliday, M.A.K. (1996) On grammar and grammatics. In Functional descriptions: Theory into practice, ed. R. Hasan, C. Cloran, and D. Butt. Amsterdam: Benjamins

Halliday, M.A.K. (1985). An introduction to functional grammar. London: Arnold.

Halliday, M. A. K., & Greaves, W. S. (2008). Intonation in the Grammar of English.

Hao, J., & Hood, S. (2019). Valuing science: The role of language and body language in a health science lecture. Journal of Pragmatics , 139 , 200-215.

Higgins, A. (2022). Novak Djokovic through Australia's Pandemic Looking Glass: Denied Natural Justice, Faulted by Open Justice and Failed by a Legal System Unable to Stop the Arbitrary Use of State Power. Civil Justice Quarterly , 42 .

Hommerberg, C., & Don, A. (2015). Appraisal and the language of wine appreciation: A critical discussion of the potential of the Appraisal framework as a tool to analyse specialised genres. Functions of Language, 22(2), 161-191. https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.22.2.01hom

Kampmark, B. (2022). The trouble with God powers: The Novak Djokovic case. Eureka Street , 32 (2), 14-17.

- [https://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article/the-trouble-with-god-powers--the-novak-djokovic-case](https://www.eurekastreet.com.au/article/the-trouble-with-god-powers--the-novak-djokovic-case)

- Kendon, A. (2004). Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
- Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: The modes and media of contemporary communication. London: Arnold Publishers
- Komninos, N. (2011). Searching for Coherence: An Exercise in Multi-Translator Translation in Identities in Transition in the English-Speaking World . Udine: Forum (pp.331-346) DOI:10.1400/183375
- Martin,  J.  R.  (2017).  The  discourse  semantics  of  attitudinal  relations:  Continuing  the  study  of  lexis. Russian  Journal  of Linguistics, 21 (1), 22-47. https://doi.org/10.22363/2312-9182-2017-21-1-22-47
- Martin, J. R., & White, P. R. (2005). The Language of Evaluation. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
- Martin, J. R., & Zappavigna, M. (2019). Embodied meaning: A systemic functional perspective on paralanguage. Functional Linguistics , 6 (1), 1-33.
- Mills, K. A., Stone, B. G., Unsworth, L., & Friend, L. (2020). Multimodal Language of Attitude in Digital Composition. Written Communication, 37(2), 135-166. https://doi.org/10.1177/0741088319897978
- Ngo, T. (2018). Gesture as transduction of characterisation in children's literature animation adaptation. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy , 41 (1), 30-43.
- Ngo, T., Hood, S., Martin, J. R., Painter, C., Smith, B. A., & Zappavigna, M. (2021). Modelling Paralanguage Using Systemic Functional Semiotics: Theory and Application . Bloomsbury Publishing.
- Norris, S. (2019). Systematically working with multimodal data: Research methods in multimodal discourse analysis. John Wiley & Sons.

O'Halloran, K. L. (2011). Multimodal discourse analysis. Companion to Discourse. London and New York: Continuum.

- Querol-Julián, M., & Fortanet-Gómez, I. (2012). Multimodal evaluation in academic discussion sessions: How do presenters act and react?. English for Specific Purposes , 31 (4), 271-283.

Swain, E. (2012) 'Analysing evaluation in political cartoons', Discourse, Context & Media 1 (2), 82-94.

Thompson, G. (2014). Affect and emotion, target-value mismatches, and Russian dolls. Evaluation in context , 47 , 66.

- White, P. R. R. (2003). Beyond modality and hedging: A dialogic view of the language of intersubjective stance. Text, 23(2), 259-284. https://doi.org/10.1515/text.2003.01

White, P. R. (2014). The attitudinal work of news journalism images-a search for visual and verbal analogues.

Zappavigna, M. (2011). Ambient affiliation: A linguistic perspective on Twitter. New media & society , 13 (5), 788-806.

## Appendix

Figure 1: An expanded view of the corpus

<!-- image -->