Narrative and analytical interplay in history texts: recalibrating the historical recount genre

ABSTRACT

Based on Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) informed genre theory, this paper investigates the interplay between narrative and analytical representations of the past in texts used for history-educational purposes. In this paper, it is argued that the role of narrative merits further attention in history genre descriptions. Thirteen history texts, selected from a lower-secondary history-instructional unit about European colonization, are examined. The examination of stages, narrative elements, and the way historical significance is expressed in these texts arrives at a re-calibration of the historical recount genre suggesting four distinct historical recount types with different configurations of a narrative-analytical interplay. The findings have implications for our understanding of the role of narrative elements in history texts, and further for genre-based approaches to instruction that concern reading and writing history texts.

KEYWORDS:

• Genre pedagogy
• historical recount
• history education
• history genres
• narratives

Introduction

As a domain of inquiry, history can be understood in two dimensions: as (re)telling stories from the past, and as analysis and interpretation of these stories (Christie & Derewianka, 2008). Given these two dimensions, the task of identifying the linguistic aspects of school history texts so that learners, in turn, can be made aware of how they function to express historical understanding, represents considerable challenges to content-based language teaching approaches (Creese, 2005; Stoller, 2008). Research on issues related to these challenges is, therefore, valuable to history educators especially in today’s globalized educational settings (Coffin, 2006a).

The Sydney school genre pedagogy (e.g. Martin & Rose, 2008, henceforth: genre pedagogy) represents perhaps the most ambitious effort so far to map out the role of language in various curriculum domains (Johns, 2008). Informed by Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014), the genre theory related to this pedagogical approach has taken aim at capturing literacy demands in the form of genres: Linguistically distinct discourse patterns reflecting educationally valued epistemological practices (Christie & Martin, 2009).

For educators of secondary school history, history genre descriptions (Christie & Derewianka, 2008; Coffin, 1997) have provided instructionally productive explications of the role of language in construing history knowledge (Gebhard & Harman, 2011). These descriptions label and map out texts that students are commonly expected to read or write. Such genre descriptions include historical recounts, period studies, historical expositions, and consequential explanations (Christie & Derewianka, 2008; Coffin, 1997; Martin & Rose, 2008; Rose & Martin, 2012).

There is evidence that such descriptions, when thoughtfully integrated in history teaching sequences, can work productively to develop students’ historical knowledge (Coffin, 2006a). However, for two important reasons, the history genre descriptions hitherto proposed may merit further attention. First, while SFL-informed genre theory has produced meaningful distinctions between history genres, there is, from a history-educational perspective, perhaps some negligence of qualitative differences within genres. For example, two different history textbooks that present factors leading up to World War 2 would, in terms of history genres, represent two examples of the same type of explanation (the factorial explanation genre). From a history educator’s perspective, however, they may still represent qualitatively ‘different lenses’ (Wilson & Wineburg, 1988, p. 525); perhaps the one text emphasizes the impact of individual actions and national sentiments, while the other foregrounds economic factors. Aligning genre descriptions more closely with different explanative perspectives (e.g. materialistic vs idealistic perspectives) represents a potentially fruitful enhancement of genre-pedagogy-based history instruction.

Another reason history genres merit further attention is linked to the role of narratives in history. Often, history genre descriptions (Christie, 2012; Christie & Derewianka, 2008; Coffin, 1997) tend to represent history education in schools as a gradual movement away from the story-like genres of the early school years, limited to narrative and everyday literacy practices, and towards late-adolescence arguing genres that are thought of as required for abstract discourse and analytical understanding (Christie & Derewianka, 2008). In history-educational practice, however, narratives are often a valued form of discourse regardless of age level (Barton & Levstik, 2004; Bage, 2012; Eliasson & Nordgren, 2016). Although students’ writing is increasingly geared towards the arguing genres over the school years, textbooks generally tend to substantially rely on narrative elements, also at higher educational stages (Eggins et al., 1993).

Examining more closely the nature of the interplay between narrative and analytical representations, rather than the movement from one to the other, can contribute to the development of genre-based history teaching practices. This is precisely what this study sets out to do. With a focus on the story-like historical recount genre (e.g. Coffin, 1997), I will argue that differences in acknowledgement of historical significance can serve as 1) the basis for understanding various forms of interplay between narrative and analytical representations and 2) as a ground for subcategorization of the historical recount genre.

Related research

Although the role of narrative in history has not been extensively researched within the field of history education (Barton & Levstik, 2004), there is agreement that narratives are a pedagogical asset valued by history educators (Vass, 2004). However, there is also scepticism towards unreflective use of stories that invite students to ‘empathize with a protagonist’s perspective without motivating critical analysis’ (Levstik & Thornton, 2018, p. 486). Levstik (1986) found an example of this in a participant-observational study of a sixth-grade US classroom, where reading Anne Frank: The diary of a young girl triggered student engagement with historical events, but also seemed to make them less concerned with alternative perspectives. Similar findings were reported by D’Adamo and Fallace (2011) in a study where middle-school students wrote texts in a range of narrative writing. Although this seemed to foster empathy, historically credible perspective-taking remained a challenge, especially in story writing.

Understanding alternative perspectives, and other modes of analysing, reasoning, and making arguments about the past, count among the history-educational goals most valued by scholars (Lévesque & Clark, 2018; Van Boxtel & Van Drie, 2018). In an observational study of upper-secondary students learning about Sweden’s mid-19^th century transition to parliamentarism, Halldén (1994) found that while students tended to ‘cling to a narrative method of history’ (1994, p. 208) and accept historical accounts at face value, the teacher’s goal was rather for students to align with the historians’ view (as represented in the textbooks) and identify these accounts as constructed.

Influential efforts to conceptualize historians’ analytical rather than narrative view of the past include those of Wineburg (1991), Seixas (2017), and Van Boxtel and Van Drie (2013). While these efforts have largely been guided by cognitive approaches aiming for conceptual change, moving students from an everyday frame of reference to an analytical conceptual framework (Levstik & Thornton, 2018), there has, in general, been scarce interest in the type of language needed for realizing this change (Coffin, 2004).

As an exception, genre pedagogy related, SFL-informed research in the Sydney school tradition focuses on the role of language in construing historical knowledge (Martin, 2015). For instance, Eggins et al. (1993) have used the SFL (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014) to analyse post-secondary school history textbooks. They identified nominalizations of verbs and adjectives as a linguistic resource crucial for analysis of the past and found that by ascribing an agentive role to nominalizations (e.g. letting the nominalization ‘fundamental changes’ function as an agent that can ‘mark’ new eras), textbooks shift attention from temporally sequenced events and individual actions, towards analytical organizations of events; organizations where the event is the outcome of, or the driving force behind, activities of generic classes of people, institutions, or factors. This shift, Eggins and colleagues observed, could be understood as a genre progression, a continuum of textual discourse patterns ranging from story-like to abstract. They identified three history genres along this cline: ‘narrative-like’, Report, and Argument (Eggins et al., 1993, p. 82). Eggins and colleagues concluded that while story-like genres can be useful for illustrating generalizations (e.g. Michelangelo illustrating the Renaissance), the Argument (or arguing) genres should be privileged in history education as they more adequately reflect the discursive practices of scholarly historians.

Coffin (1997) has extended on the genre progression proposed by Eggins and colleagues in an SFL-informed genre analysis of a representative sample of some 1,000 history texts written by secondary students in an Australian educational context. She arrived at a classification that related these texts to various social purposes: recording, explaining, and arguing. Within these broad genre families, a finer distinction was made between key history genres with more specific purposes: autobiographical/biographical recount, historical recount/account, factorial/consequential explanation, and arguing by way of either exposition, discussion, or challenge (Coffin, 2006b).

Like Eggins and colleagues, Coffin took these key genres to represent points along a recording-explaining-arguing continuum. As this continuum coincided with the progression in writing demands occurring over the years of schooling (Coffin, 1997; Veel & Coffin, 1996), it further provided a type of learning pathway where ‘at the one end of the pathway lie the genres that comprise the domain of narrative and at the other end the genres that comprise the domain of argument’ (Coffin, 1997, p. 196).

Christie and Derewianka (2008) have built on the work of Coffin to further detail this narrative-to-analytical-movement. Extending on the genre trajectory proposed by Coffin, Christie and Derewianka detailed the linguistic demands on control over staging, sequencing of information and attitudinal positioning posed by different genres. Drawing on empirical data in the form of some 2,000 Australian primary and secondary students’ texts, their SFL-informed analysis of a representative sample of documents supported the notion of a history genre trajectory ranging from early childhood to late adolescence writing. The trajectory suggests a development from recounting genres oriented to reconstructing the past as retellings of personal or historical events, to arguing genres concerned with reviewing (i.e. analysing) the historical past (Christie & Derewianka, 2008).

Of further relevance to the present study is Coffin’s (2002) SFL- and Appraisal framework (Martin & White, 2005) informed examination of different ‘voices’ of school history texts. Coffin found that, in texts written by secondary school history students, these authors employed various linguistic resources to assume either the voice of a ‘Recorder, an ‘Interpreter’, or an ‘Adjudicator’, representing increasingly interpretative stances towards the events presented in the texts. Recently, Myskow (2017) has suggested that in secondary school history textbooks, a ‘Surveyor’ voice is prominent, a voice that ‘fashions itself as a disinterested topographer’ (Myskow, 2017, p. 8) of a historical landscape and one that can be located at an intermediary position in the Recorder to Adjudicator continuum.

Based on this review, there seems to be, in history genre research, consensus around the position that genres can be hierarchically ordered from story-like genres retelling the past to more complex genres suited for analysis and arguing historical perspectives. This should not be taken to imply that, in history genre research, the goal is to eliminate narratives from history education. Martin and Rose (2008, 2012) have proposed the concept of macrogenres to explain how, typically in textbooks, story-like genres can, for illustrative purposes, be integrated into larger, explaining- or arguing-oriented, genre complexes. As noted by Myskow (2017) history textbook can use voices in various ways to foreground ‘personas novice writers are expected to simulate in their written essays’ (Myskow, 2017, p. 13), essays often expected to integrate these individual figures and events into analyses of historical development trends.

However, the more precise, linguistic dimension of the integration of narrative and analytical representations of the past is an issue that has, it appears, been left somewhat unattended in history genre descriptions. Assuming that the integration takes form as an interplay between narrative and analytical representations of the past, rather than as a movement from one to the other, the present paper sets out to explore this interplay.

Theoretical framework: historical understanding and history genres

The theoretical framework of the present study combines an SFL-informed view on genres (e.g. Christie & Derewianka, 2008; Coffin, 1997; Rose & Martin, 2012) with a socio-cultural view on school history as a citizenship education subject (Barton & Levstik, 2004). In general, these genre descriptions assume a form of developmental trajectory for the history subject area, meaning that in the early years of schooling, students’ activities are primarily about ‘simple recording and/or description of events’ (Christie & Derewianka, 2008, p. 87). While students’ writing in these early years is concerned with correspondingly ‘simple’ recounting and recording genres, in the senior years, students need to command advanced historiographical skills and genres, helping them to become ‘discerning consumers of historical information’ and additionally to be able to ‘participate in the kind of critical analysis required of the discipline’ (Christie & Derewianka, 2008, p. 146)

While SFL-informed history genre descriptions (e.g. Coffin, 1997) do recognize that the purpose of school history is not to turn students into ‘mini-historians’, the somewhat linear appearance of the ‘trajectory’ might convey the notion that some (senior school years) genres are ‘more advanced’ than others, and that the end goal of school history is the analytical skills of scholarly historians (see Kindenberg et al.,, for a further discussion). In the present study, the proposition is that the purpose of school history is to initiate students into the cultural community as citizens (Barton & Levstik, 2004), rather than to initiate them into a scholarly community as professionals and, further, that narratives are a form of historical sense-making that is neither opposed to, nor separated from, historical analysis.

Barton and Levstik (2004), suggest that the purpose of school history is to develop certain historical ‘stances’ that citizens in a pluralistic society need to be able to assume.

These stances are concerned with helping students to identify and associate themselves with individuals, groups of people, and certain events in the past (Identification stance); to analyse and generalize about the past (an Analytic stance that establishes causality within and between events); to respond morally (Moral response stance) towards events and persons, for instance, commemorating, condemning, or admiring these; and to assemble and display historical information (Exhibition stance).

The stance perspective recognizes interconnectedness between structures and factors (social, economic, ideologic, technologic, etc.), and the agentive role of individuals. This means that students need to be able to identify both with individuals and generalized collectives in the past. In school history educational practice, identification is sometimes confined to identification with historic individuals, with whom students can identify based on their own personal experiences of being oppressed, being interested in new discoveries, or for some other reason (Barton & Levstik, 2004). But when students are offered opportunities to recognize that certain persons or groups of people in the past belong to the same group as themselves (e.g. Europeans, the middle-class, capitalist societies), this generalized identification may deepen their understanding of how events in the past may have affected the present.

The citizenship education perspective, furthermore, foregrounds a moral response to past events. Students need to see that they might themselves be part of oppressed, or oppressive, structures and institutions and, further, to recognize the ethically problematic aspects of these institutions. Thus, this moral response is linked to a recognition of the historical implications of past events; tracing the historical roots of current social injustices is a way for history education to provide valuable ‘lessons from the past’ (Barton & Levstik, 2004, p. 69).

Important to the argument in this paper, Barton and Levstik (2004) propose that ‘narratives’, alongside ‘inquiry’ and ‘empathy’ represent cultural tools for making sense of the past, whether this sense-making in terms of identification, analysis, or some other stance. Thus, narratives do not represent a ‘simpler’ genre for realizing a restricted form of historical understanding but one that can, in various ways, have analytical orientations as well. The ‘narrative-to-analytical’ trajectory reflected in history genre descriptions is, as previously noted, held up for examination in this paper. However, these empirically grounded and conceptually detailed genre descriptions (e.g. Coffin, 2006a) provide theoretical insights and also analytical tools for identifying discourse patterns in history texts. SFL-informed history genre theory, therefore, represents an essential component of my theoretical framework and the methods for analysis, a component to which I now turn.

SFL-informed genre theory is concerned with how language, in socially recognizable ways, functions to achieve various curricular purposes (Christie & Derewianka, 2008). In SFL theory (Halliday & Matthiessen, 2014), language realizes the expected meaning potential of a certain situational context through a configuration of three contextual register variables: field (subject matter or topic), tenor (roles and relationships), and mode (form of representation, from spoken to written). The language that mediates this delivery is a lexicogrammatical (i.e. relating to vocabulary, syntax, and grammar) configuration of three metafunctions that corresponds to the register variables: the ideational metafunction (corresponding to field), the interpersonal metafunction (tenor), and the textual metafunction (mode).

In schools, register variables in texts are often sufficiently patterned, generic, and regularly recurring to be thought of as genres. These can be arranged into genre families (Rose & Martin, 2012) that respond to general social purpose: engaging genres (including narratives and recounts), informing genres (including explanations and reports), and evaluating genres (including reviews and arguments). If, for example, the overall purpose of a text is to retell historical events in the order they occurred, it is considered a form of recount, more specifically a historical recount. Table 1 shows an overview of common history genre families, genres, their overall purposes, and how they are staged.

Table 1. An overview of history genres (Coffin, 2006b, p. 418); brackets indicate optional stages

Genre family	Genre	Overall purpose	Stages
Recording	Autobiographical recount	to retell the events of your own life	Orientation; Record of events (Reorientation)
	Biographical recount	to retell the events of a person’s life	Orientation; Record of events (Evaluation of person)
	Historical recount	to retell events in the past	Background; Record of events (Deduction)
	Historical account	to account for why events happened in a particular sequence	Background; Account of events (Deduction)
Explaining	Factorial explanation	to explain the reasons or factors that contribute to a particular outcome	Outcome; Factors; Reinforcement of factors
	Consequential explanation	to explain the effects or consequences of a situation	Input; Consequences; Reinforcement of consequences
Arguing	Exposition	to put forward a point of view or argument	Background; Thesis; Arguments; Reinforcement of thesis
	Discussion	to argue the case for two or more points of view about an issue	Background; Issue; Arguments/perspectives; Position
	Challenge	to argue against a view	Background; Position challenged; Arguments; Anti-thesis

It is the staging of the genres, that is, the culturally expected sequencing of discourse, that makes genres recognizable and enables them to achieve their respective purpose (Coffin, 1997). The historical recount, for example, typically follows a sequence where an initial Background stage establishes an ideational and interpersonal context for the text and is followed by a Record of events stage and an optional Deduction stage. Within these stages, at the level of clause, lexis, and grammar, genres recruit functional linguistic resources to establish temporality, causative chains, or chains of arguments.

Materials and methods

Data

The data used (see Table 2) consist of educational history texts, collected in 2017 as part of a broader case study. The case study covered a history-educational instructional unit in a grade-eight classroom at a school in Stockholm, Sweden. The five-week instructional unit focused on the encounter between European and American cultures during the 1400s to the early 1600s. For the students’ writing assignment, where they were free to choose topic, the teacher had compiled a list of resources from which texts were selected for analysis.

Table 2. Data

Text	Title (translated from Swedish)	Description	Type of data	Quantity (□ words/minutes)
E1	Christopher Columbus—Wikipedia	Text from Wikipedia (.se)	Electronic resource	Ca 4200
E2	Hernan Cortés—Wikipedia	Text from Wikipedia (.se)		Ca 2200
E3	Christopher Columbus’ discovery of America	Text from web page SO-rummet		Ca 1000
E4	Magellan and the first circumnavigation of the Earth	Text from web page SO-rummet		Ca 600
E5	Vasco da Gama and the sea route to India	Text from web page SO-rummet		Ca 450
E6	Cortez conquers the Aztec Empire	Text from web page SO-rummet		Ca 850
E7	Pizzaro and the conquest of the Inca Empire	Text from web page SO-rummet		Ca 900
E8	Vasco da Gama	Text from web page historiesajten.se		Ca 700
E9	Ferdinand Magellan	Text from web page historiesajten.se		Ca 800
E10	Ferdinand Magellan—Wikipedia	Text from Wikipedia (.se)		Ca 1400
T1	New routes across the seas	Textbook section on colonization and trade	Textbook	Ca 1200
F1	Magellan—the first circumnavigator of the Earth	Educational film	Film, audio transcribed	14 min
F2	World History part 5: Money and Plundering	Educational film		50 min

The texts selected are listed in Table 2. Since students were free to seek information online, some students used other texts as well. The texts selected (Table 2) thus represent a sample of the history text landscape that was open to the class throughout the instructional unit. This sample was based on texts that appeared ‘story-like’ (Martin & Rose, 2008) and could be expected to fall within, or display elements of, the broad ‘story family’ proposed by Martin and Rose (2008, p. 46). Such story-like texts were those that featured one (or more) historical figure(s) and retold a specific historical event. This included texts on historically famous explorers or conquerors (e.g. Columbus or Cortez, and their respective exploration/conquest) but excluded factual texts describing and explicating historical phenomena, for instance, how the Aztec empire functioned.

The texts selected included both printed and electronic texts, as well as the spoken narration in educational films, indicated with the letter T, E, or F in Table 2. The spoken narrations of the films were transcribed. All texts were in Swedish; post-analysis, I translated parts relevant for my presentation of findings. The electronic texts were resources from Wikipedia, and historiesajten.se (Swedish spelling of ‘the history site’) and SO-rummet (‘The Social Studies Room’); two popular Swedish online history-educational resource sites authored by teachers.

Analysis

My analysis has been concerned with the interplay between narrative and analytical representations of the past in history genre texts. The analytical process consisted of three steps: 1) identifying how, in the texts, the past was narrated, looking at their narrative elements; 2) identifying how past events were evaluated in terms of historical significance; and 3) examining the interplay between narrative and analytical representations.

In my analysis, I have applied categories derived from register analysis (SFL), such as the field and tenor variables. Field represents the content of discourse: what is happening, when, where, why, in what manner, and so on. Field variables are realized lexicogrammatically as participants (who, what), processes (the doings), and circumstances (when, where, how). Tenor represents relations established between participants, including attitudinal lexis for evaluating and positioning what the text is about. To identify tenor relations, Martin and White (2005) have suggested the Appraisal framework that distinguishes between three various systems for evaluating things: Appreciation (assessing form and impact of phenomena), Judgement (assessing human behaviour), and Affect (concerned with emotional reaction). The use of these categories is further detailed below.

Narrating the past: narrative elements

Narrative elements in the texts were identified based on the suggestion by Martin (2007; and also; Martin & Rose, 2008) that stories use language to engage the reader with the content of the story. These functions, named narrative elements, are summarized in Table 3. In this table, the narrative elements have been ordered under three headings; ‘Story structure’, representing the overall unfolding of the text, which is considered a textual resource; Concreteness, representing an ideational set of resources; and Invitation to react, corresponding to interpersonal resources (see the Theoretical framework section for a further mention of textual, ideational, and interpersonal register variables).

Table 3. Linguistic realizations of narrative elements

Narrative elements
Narrative elements (engaging the reader with the story)			Linguistic realizations
Story structure (textual resources)
Presenting context
	A setting is presented, relevant to understanding what the story is about (including mention of time, place, important recent events, and so on).		Initially in the text, the (historical) setting of the events is presented. Example: ‘Ferdinand Magellan, (or Fernão de Magalhães) as he is called in Portuguese, was born in the spring of 1480 in Sabrosa near Villa Real in Portugal’.
Creating and releasing tension
	The story is organized around a problem (finding new land), and its solution.		The text initially identifies a problem (‘no one had found a passage to India’); obstacles are signalled (‘but … ’), and a solution is presented (‘Finally, land was in sight!’)
Succeeding events
	The story unfolds in time, building tension (‘what happens next?’).		Chronological sequencing of events Example: ‘10 January 1520, they came to Rio de la Plata’; ‘In August, they continued … ’; ‘Finally, they found … ’
Concreteness (ideational resources)
Evoking context
	Concrete locations in time and place to create a sense of immediacy (historical presence). Imagery and descriptive expressions are used to draw the reader into the story.		Concrete Participants (named individuals); Specific circumstances of time and place: ‘In September 1492, they arrived at the Canary Islands’. ‘Early dawn, the sound of the watch was heard: “Land o’hoy!”’
Intruding participants” thoughts
	The story invites the reader to ‘take part’ (historical presence) by representing persons’ experiences and thoughts.		Concrete participants (e.g. ‘Christopher Columbus’) and mental or verbal (sometimes behavioural) Processes related to that person (‘Columbus dared to’), as well as circumstances of manner (‘he stubbornly refused’)
Invitation to react (interpersonal resources)
Material outcome
	Inviting the reader to experience or react to the events in a ‘physical’ sense.		Interpersonal resources: actions and/or experiences that invoke ±AFFECT (positive or negative reactions: happiness/unhappiness; satisfaction/dissatisfaction; insecurity/security) Example: ‘The strait was difficult and dangerous to navigate’ (-AFFECT: unhappiness/insecurity)
Attitudinal outcome
	Inviting the reader to react to the participant, either with admiration or (moral) reproach.		Interpersonal resources: Language that invokes Appraisal in the Judgement subcategories Normality, Capacity, Tenacity, Veracity, or Propriety; overt or invoked. Example, overt: ‘Cortez was a ruthless commander’ (-PROP) Example, invoked: ‘Cortez had no intention to keep his promise’ (-VER)
	Judgement subcategories used		Example
		Normality (±NORM)Indicating individual/behaviour being special (+) or mundane (-)	‘Fernando Magellan was the person who led the sea expedition that first sailed around the world’ (+NORM, +CAP, +TEN)
		Capacity (±CAP) Indicating individual/behaviour being capable (+) or incompetent (-)
		Tenacity (±TEN) Indicating individual/behaviour being persistent (+) or non-persistent (-)
		Veracity (±VER) Indicating individual/behaviour being truthful (+) or dishonest (-)
		Propriety (±PROP) Indicating individual/behaviour being ethical (+) or unethical/cruel (-)

In the texts examined, concrete participants in the texts (e.g. ‘Columbus’, ‘King Charles V’) were considered engaging as they present the reader with a specific person, as opposed to collectives or institutions, that is, abstract participants (e.g. ‘Spain’, ‘the Catholic church’). Furthermore, specific circumstances of time and place (e.g. ‘early morning on the 12^th of October 1492’) were considered as more engaging, compared to generally described circumstances (e.g. ‘in the 15^th century’). More concreteness was seen as creating a sense of ‘historical presence’, enhancing engagement with the story. Additionally, mental processes (e.g. ‘thought’ or ‘decided’) were considered narrative elements that engaged the reader with the participants as these verbs intrude participants’ own experiences, thus bringing them closer to the reader.

Stories can further engage the reader by making readers react to the attitudes, behaviour, or actions of the participants. Following Martin and Rose (2008), I have labelled such responses attitudinal outcome and material outcome respectively. Attitudinal outcome concerns the positive or negative evaluation personality traits or actions of participants. In the Appraisal framework (Martin & White, 2005), the Judgement category specifies evaluations of peoples’ behaviour in a number of subcategories: normality (how special someone is), capacity (how capable), tenacity (how dependent, or persistent), veracity (how honest), and propriety (how reproachable/far beyond reproach). Positive or negative judgements are represented as ±NORM, ±CAP, ±TEN, ±VER, ±PROP, with a plus sign indicating admiration, a minus sign criticism. These subcategories were used as codes to capture the attitudinal outcome.

Material outcomes are those that invite emotional reactions, for example, by describing ‘vivid details’ (e.g. storms or violent deaths). This reaction was analysed in the Affect category (Martin & White, 2005) as either +AFFECT or -AFFECT. Plus- or minus signs indicate that either a positive or a negative reaction is to be expected (e.g. ‘Atahualpa was strangled’; -AFFECT).

Analytical elements: acknowledgement of historical significance

To identify how past events were evaluated, that is, the analytical representation of the past, the acknowledgement of historical significance of these events was examined. Categories related to evaluations of past events are included in Table 3. Different types of acknowledgements were identified using the Appreciation category in the Appraisal framework, a category that is concerned with the appreciation of human events and affairs. The Appreciation category falls into three subcategories: reaction, composition, and valuation (Martin & White, 2005). The composition category is concerned with how balanced and complex the event is, a perception related to ‘our view of order’ (Martin & White, 2005, p. 57). The composition subcategory was not used in the analysis, since it confined to an appreciation of the event as such, rather than with its (historical) significance. The analytical elements are shown in Table 4.

Table 4. Linguistic realizations of analytical elements

Analytical elements
	Acknowledgement of historical significance		Linguistic realization
Historical significance: uniqueness
	Historical events are being acknowledged as unique, remarkable, or pioneering achievements (not in terms of long-term significance)		Evaluation (of an event) in the Appreciation subcategory of Reaction (see below)
Historical significance: historical implications
	The significance of historical events is acknowledged in terms of long-term historical implications for political and economic development		Evaluation (of an event) in the Appreciation subcategory of Valuation (see below)
	Appreciation subcategories used		Example quote
		+REAC (historical uniqueness); indicates personal reaction, the event is impressive or sensational.	‘Vasco da Gama’s expedition was the first to circumnavigate the Earth’
		±VAL (historical implications) Indicates a consequential event, whether positive (+) or negative (-); the event has long-term consequences	‘Vasco da Gama’s expedition led to changes in European trade patterns’

In my analysis, I have expanded on the reaction (REAC) and valuation (VAL) categories (cf. Martin & White, 2005). In the analysis, the reaction category is concerned with the impression the event makes on the individual (being perceived, e.g. as remarkable, sensational, unremarkable). As Martin and White (2005) note, Reaction is related to emotional responses, in terms of how ‘attention-grabbing’ an event is. Hence, this subcategory was used to capture instances where events were represented as unique and unprecedented, without necessarily having any long-term effect on economic and political development. For instance, ‘Columbus had achieved something no one had done before’ (+REAC) was categorized as positive appreciation of significance in terms of uniqueness (long-term implications of Columbus’ achievement are absent).

The valuation (VAL) subcategory concerns the value the event has outside their impact on the individual, captured in aspects such as ‘penetrating’ and ‘profound’ (Martin & White, 2005, p. 56). Based on the SFL-informed notion of metafunctions of language, Martin and White suggest a further distinction between the reaction and valuation subcategories, a distinction that orients the former to interpersonal significance and the latter to ‘ideational worth’ (Martin & White, 2005, p. 57). In the analysis, I have applied this distinction in such a way that reaction is concerned with events (i.e. the voyages of discovery) being ‘attention-grabbing’ and never-before accomplished achievements. Valuations, on the other hand, is concerned with the value, the material ‘ideational worth’ the event (in this case, the voyage) has for the world, beyond representing a form of ‘historically record-breaking’ triumph. Appreciations that were concerned with such long-term effects were seen as being concerned with historical implications and were coded as either +VAL or -VAL (positive or negative long-term consequences). Should the above description of Columbus, by contrast, have been along the lines of ‘Columbus had achieved something that would have long-lasting effect on European trade’, that would have been considered a reference to historical implications (+VAL).¹

Interplay between narrative and analytical representations

Following the above identification of narrative and analytical elements, I examined how these were interrelated. This was a synthesizing step of the analytical procedure, where I looked at the extent to which narrative elements (e.g. a character’s thoughts and actions) were associated with:

1. appreciation of historical significance in terms of historical implications,

2. moral response to historical consequences, and/or

3. identification with other events, groups of people, or phenomenon in the past or the present

If, for instance, mental processes were shown to reflect not just the experience of a specific historic individual, but also ideologies of the time, this was seen as an example of an interplay between the narrative and the analytic. An example commonly found in the texts was when the personality of a European explorer (e.g. that he was ruthless), was used as an example of a general European colonial mindset. Another resource for interplay is the connection between the past and the present in the form of individuals and institutions or collectives. When links between concrete participants (e.g. Columbus) and abstract, generalized participants (e.g. Europeans) were made, and when it was further expanded this collective over historical time (i.e. recognizing that today’s Europeans belong to this collective), this was seen as a narrative-analytical interplay.

In the analysis, I looked at what type of historical significance was being acknowledged at various stages of the historical recount texts. Stages represent the ‘steps’ through which a text unfolds and are crucial components for organizing information and making meaning (Rose & Martin, 2012). The stages were identified using history genre descriptions (Christie & Derewianka, 2008; Coffin, 1997; Martin & Rose, 2008). For the Recording Coffin (1997; 2006b, see also Table 1) suggests the following sequence: Background, Record of events, Deduction stage. The function of the Background stage is to ‘summarize previous historical events that will make more meaningful the events focused on in the body of the text’ (Coffin, 1997, p. 204). The Record of events stage chronicles and elaborates a sequence of events, while a concluding Deduction stage ‘functions to draw out the historical significance of these events’ (ibid). As the textbooks did not always follow this suggested sequence, I differentiated between those significance-deducing stages that appeared concludingly in the text (called Deduction), those that appeared initially (called Abstract, though functioning as Deduction stages), and finally those that were inserted within the Recount of events stage (called Comment).

This stage analysis helped determine whether this acknowledgement was foregrounded. If the acknowledgement of significance was made in an initial (Abstract) or concluding (Deduction) stage of the texts, it was considered foregrounded. Otherwise (when the acknowledgement was made in a Comment stage) it was seen as being given less prominence. When both historical uniqueness and implications were acknowledged, the type acknowledged in the initial Abstract stage was seen as the one given precedence in the texts. For instance, if an acknowledgement of historical implications of Columbus voyage occurred in the Abstract or Deduction stage, that was seen as an interplay between narrative and analytical, that is, the staging helped frame the recording of this event as a story, but also a story with long-term historical implications.

In the analysis, I have separated genres based on their acknowledgement of historical significance, as well as the way these texts structured and narrated the content. Here, an argument could be made that a different set of texts might have arrived at a different typology. In the present study, I have sought proximity to instructional context and the sample of texts was grounded in my case study observations of these texts in use. In contexts such as this one, it is not uncommon for students to seek information from a wide range of educational texts, both in print and electronic, and, hence, come across texts that are not easily corralled into existing genre classificatory spaces. That is, the wider the range of texts students encounter, the higher the probability that these texts will represent subtle genre variations.

Findings

As a result of my analysis, I identified four variations of the historical recount genre, which I have called historical recount types; different in terms of narrative-analytical interplay. Shown in Figure 1 are the different staging of these genres, what type of acknowledgement of historical significance were made in these texts, and further how weak/strong the narrative-analytical interplay was. These features of these texts will be discussed in the following sections.

Figure 1. Historical recount types (1–4)—Genre staging with acknowledgement of historical significance.

In Figure 1, the Deduction, Abstract and Comment stages have been qualified with the type of historical significance acknowledged (historical uniqueness or historical implications, as highlighted). The Record of events stage appeared in all texts, unsurprisingly since this was a selection criterion, and this was the stage of the texts were most narrative elements were found, meaning that this stage represented the ‘core’ of the respective ‘explorer story’. A Background stage, preceding the Recount stage, providing background information about the setting in time and place, was also present in all texts.

Text example

Described below are the four historical recount types identified from the examined text. To present the reader with an idea of the appearance of the texts examined, a representative example text, ‘Magellan and the first circumnavigation of the Earth’ (Transcript 1), will first be described. In this description, and in the ensuing sections, narrative elements (see Table 3) are colour-coded in grey, and acknowledgements of historical significance either yellow for historical uniqueness, or green for historical implications.

In the text shown in Transcript 1, the Abstract stage acknowledges the historical uniqueness of Magellan’s expedition; that he ‘first sailed around the world’. The following Background stage sets the historical context, using general indications of time (‘the early 16^th century’) and provides information about Magellan and the reasons for explorations.

The shift from Background to Record of events stage is marked by an enhanced focus on time (e.g. ‘On 20 September 1519’). The stage unfolds as a series of succeeding events, marked by circumstances of time in the initial sentence position, all contributing narrative elements to the text. Other narrative elements include concrete participants (e.g. Magellan’s captains, King Charles V) whose thoughts and experiences are being realized as mental processes (e.g. ‘decided’, ‘convinced’).

Many of these narrative elements invite the reader to react, either as an emotional reaction (in the +AFFECT category) to the persistence, bravery, and otherwise favourable characteristics ascribed to Magellan, or as responses to vivid details about the dangers and dramatic nature of the expedition (e.g. ‘the strait was dangerous and difficult to navigate’, invoking feelings of insecurity in the -AFFECT category). As can be seen in the extract, the text makes overall use of narrative elements by evoking an exciting sea voyage as the context for the story; following secret maps to unknown locations, making landfalls at perilous islands, quenching mutinies, and so on. Although the text is somewhat shortened, the overall story structure, with a mission/problem being accomplished/solved is still discernable in the text.

Historical recount type 1

The exemplifying text in Transcript 1 also represents a Historical recount type 1. These texts have a large degree of narrative elements; they focus on individual actors, they recurrently invite the reader to react emotionally, share the characters’ thoughts, and so on. In this type of Historical recount, the significance of the expeditions is acknowledged primarily in terms of their historical uniqueness (as in Transcript 1), that is, as impressive and historically pioneering achievements, but with no overtly stated long-term historical implications.

While the text in Transcript 1 includes events that, historically, had far-reaching implications (e.g. founding trade colonies), the text does not explicitly point to these as having long-term historical implications. Thus, the explorers are not set in a context of wider political or economic development in Europe. Should this have been the case, students (in the Swedish classroom context of this study) would potentially have been invited to assume an identification stance (Barton & Levstik, 2004); seeing themselves as part of the European collective (or, otherwise, as part of the groups of people being historically oppressed by Europeans). Instead, the characters are largely confined to being characters in a ‘story’ with Magellan as the hero. A deep historical understanding, in the sense of identifying characters as representatives of larger political entities, or as representing an ethically evaluable historical behaviour of these groups, is thus absent in these texts. Hence, there is no narrative-analytical interplay going on within these texts.

Historical recount type 2

Texts of the historical recount type 2 were almost identical to type 1 in terms of staging, and degree of narrative elements. They were also similar in that historical uniqueness was the foregrounded type of acknowledgement of significance. However, these texts also included remarks (inserted Comments) pointing to historical implications, a brief acknowledgement made in the Comment stage, as exemplified in Transcript 2:

The historical implications acknowledged (i.e. ‘was to have enormous significance for European trade’) in this text (and in texts like this one) provide a link to long-term consequences and generalized identification. The abstract participant in the extract, the ‘Europeans’, enables an identification between da Gama and Europeans as a historical entity, an entity with whom the reader can associate. This association would, however, likely have to be inferred since it is not made explicit in the text. Thus, the narrative-analytical interplay in these types of texts is weak (though not entirely absent) since the historical significance is not foregrounded in the staging of the text. The narrative elements in this type of Historical recount serve mostly to reinforce engagement with remarkable achievement, and a unique (though not morally irreproachable) historic individual.

Historical recount type 3

The Historical recount type 3 has the same staging as type 2 texts, and (just like the preceding types) these texts made strong use of narrative elements. In type 3 texts, however, the narrative elements could be simultaneously read as having an engaging function with the story and as being resources for a narrative-analytical interplay. This interplay was enabled by the acknowledgement of historical significance being made in the Abstract stage, as illustrated in this introduction to text F2 (Transcript 3).

In these types of texts, the ensuing events, due to the focus on long-term significance established in the Abstract stage, are framed as politically significant events with long-term implications, including the development of our current capitalist society. Thus, the narrative elements in these texts reinforce the acknowledgement of historical significance made in the Record of events stage. In the Recount of events stage of text F2, Columbus’ thoughts and actions are reconnected to the acknowledgement of historical significance: ‘Columbus immediately realized that there were three things that would guarantee Europeans dominance in the New World: Slavery, Christianity, and superior weapons’.

The intrusion of a participant’s thoughts (‘realized’) connects Columbus’ beliefs to the driving forces behind European political expansion. The mental process, for one thing, invites the reader to ‘take part”’ in the story while, simultaneously, functions to associate Columbus’ thoughts (as well as his behaviour) with plunder, unfair trade, and otherwise questionable methods, in turn associated with the ‘foundation for capitalism’.

Likewise, the negative evaluation of Columbus’ character (representing a narrative element in the attitudinal outcome category) can be linked to the negative judgement of European colonialism, and thus the reproach goes beyond condemnation of an individual explorers’ ruthless character, extending to problematizing the ethics of the system arising from this person’s mindset and behaviour. For example, the observation that Columbus ‘immediately’ recognized desirable qualities of, in fact, a morally questionable phenomenon, invokes a negative judgement of his character. As Columbus also, from the acknowledgement made in the Abstract stage, functions as a representative of European colonialism, this negative judgement ‘spills over’ to European ambitions of political dominance in general. In ways like this, narrative-analytical interplay is enforced in the Historical recount type 3 texts.

Historical recount type 4

Item T1 is a history book chapter that briefly presents Columbus and his voyages and then discusses the ensuing political and economic consequences for Europe, including the development of global trade patterns, colonialism, slave trade, and racism. In this text, I have identified the part of the text dealing specifically with Columbus as a historical recount that, as part of a macrogenre structure (Martin & Rose, 2008), constitutes the Input stage of a consequential explanation (Christie & Derewianka, 2008), as visualized in Figure 1. Unlike in other texts, the recount of a voyage is substantially expanded upon in a discussion about long-term consequences and this story-within-explanation macrostructure has been categorized as a historical recount type 4.

The explanation of consequences is the main concern of text T1 and in this explanation, the narrative elements have a vital function. Transcript 4 illustrates how narrative elements in the form of intrusion of Columbus’ intentions (what he ‘wanted’ and ‘was hoping for’, namely ‘new trades routes’) is linked to a preceding acknowledgement of historical implications (in the form of ‘new routes for trade’) for European political and economic development.

Although in item T1, the degree of narrative elements is small, it has recognizable narrative characteristics, such as specific locations in time as marked themes: ‘In September 1492, Columbus three ships raised anchor from the Canary Islands and set sails westwards’. Importantly, the story about Columbus’ voyage is then drawn on in later parts of the text to discuss the consequences of colonization, as shown in Transcript 4.

The text in Transcript 4 is from the Consequences stage of this (macrogenre) text (see Figure 1), where the consequences of the historical Input (being Columbus’s voyage) are explained. This explanation of consequences is linked to the information found in the Record of events stage (e.g. the reader is reminded about Columbus’ arrival in the Caribbean). The text uses narrative elements, in the form of intrusions of Columbus thoughts, to illustrate how his beliefs (about perceived inferiority of indigenous people) can explain a mindset enabling European colonialism, while also inviting a moral response (a narrative resource in the attitudinal outcome category) to the fact that Columbus did not, ‘even for one second’, imagined non-Europeans as individuals. In this way, a narrative-analytical interplay is brought about in the historical recount type 4an interplay that resembles the type 3 interplay, though embedded in a more complex genre structure.

Discussion

Detailed linguistic descriptions of history genres are important to educational research as well as to educators, since it is through such descriptions that ‘students’ success and progress (and therefore failure) can be articulated in precise linguistic terms’ (Coffin, 2004, p. 158). In the present study, I have examined the linguistic mechanisms of history texts, suggesting a relatively fine-grained distinction between variations of the historical recount genre, variations reflecting different ways in which narrative and analytical resource interplay. The findings differ from previous history genre descriptions (e.g. Coffin, 1997; Martin & Rose, 2008) in that they offer a means to distinguish genres based on different types of evaluation of historical events. In this regard, the study seeks to extend on previous efforts (e.g. Coffin, 2004; Myskow, 2017) to link SFL-informed genre pedagogy to a wider history-educational research context.

The present study has relied on a framework for distinguishing between texts that would, at the level of text structure and organization, be classified as belonging to the same genre (the historical recount genre). The essential distinction between these texts is the type of acknowledgement of historical significance made and how narrative resources are recruited, including those of text structure. For example, a Deduction stage commenting on Magellan’s circumnavigation of the Earth as a unique accomplishment realizes a meaning potential (Halliday, 1993) very different from what would be the case, should the Deduction stage have concerned long-term economic consequences. From the perspective of genre structure, however, such texts may appear similar or even identical. These differences have implications for authors of history textbooks, as well as for teachers. For teachers emphasizing the citizenship education aspect of history teaching (Barton & Levstik, 2004), the framework might be particularly relevant, as it is linked to a theoretical understanding of history education as the promotion of a set of ‘historical stances’.

Although SLF-informed genre theory operates with useful concepts such as macrogenres and contextual metaphors (Martin, 1997) that describe how genres may adjust and evolve to meet situation-specific needs, the present study suggests that if genre descriptions are too general, they risk obscuring qualitatively different understanding of history content. A fine-tuned recalibration of the historical recount genre can help teachers identify and select relevant types of texts and how these should be approached in instruction. For instance, a (‘story-like’) type 1 text would presumably have an immediate ‘grab’ but would also require considerable contextualization that makes the historical implications of explorations accessible to students.

In the historical recount type 2, links to historical implications are provided but their subtle presence (in Comment stages) may need to be equally highlighted by the teacher. On the other hand, the historical recount type 4, with very little narrative flesh on its analytical bones, so to speak, might be too far removed from students’ prior understanding of events for a productive narrative-analytical interplay to occur. Perhaps here, a historical recount type 1 would serve as a complement and help strengthen interplay with more analytical representations of the past.

The role of narratives is sometimes devalued in history educational theory (Barton & Levstik, 2004). However, many studies lend support to the belief held by many teachers (Bage, 2012), namely, that students’ interest in history is often enhanced by an engagement with narratives (e.g. Levstik, 1986). Given the interest that students and educators alike allocate to narratives, its role, both history educational research and genre-based instructional approaches, might be undervalued. In SFL-informed genre descriptions, an assumption is often made about a genre ‘learning pathway’, along which students advance from narrative-like genres, close to the discourse of everyday experiences, to arguing genres, where a more abstract and analytical understanding of the world is enabled (e.g. Christie & Derewianka, 2008). Though genre-based pedagogies are not devaluing narratives as such, the positioning of ‘the narrative’ in contrast to ‘the analytic’ along genre developmental trajectories has the unnecessarily troublesome implication that narrative and analytical representations of the past are mutually exclusive. The historical recount typology should be seen as an effort to identify the productive role narratives have for historical understanding.

The framework proposed in the present paper provides a starting point for examining how narrative and analytical representations of the past interplay in educational history texts. Recent work on the range of voices, such as the ‘surveyor voice’, in the historical recount genre (Myskow, 2017) provides a tool for further examination of variations within genres. For an even more fine-grained analysis of the narrative-analytical interplay, the notion of ‘coupling’ (Zappavigna et al., 2008) of ideational and evaluative resources represents a potentially productive extension of the history-text analysis framework suggested in this article (see, e.g. Hao & Humphrey, 2009 for an example from science texts).

The analysis has been primarily concerned with a specific topical context, which raises questions about the generalizability of the analysis. It is important to bear in mind that school texts, including history texts, are used in a situated context. In other words, texts, as encountered by students in actual practice are, inevitably, concerned with a specific ‘something’. Genres are bound to be ‘tinged’ by the specific educational context in which they are found (Bawarshi & Reiff, 2010). If descriptions of genres are too generalized, they run the risk of being removed from actual classroom practice. I would argue, however, that the historical recount typology I propose, based on texts about Colonization events, reflects a fairly general pattern of history texts; using narrative elements to enhance students’ historical understanding seems intuitive (Barton & Levstik, 2004; Eggins et al., 1993).

The extent to which the proposed typology is generalizable outside its immediate context would be well worth further pursuit in genre research. Considering the increasingly globalized and multicultural classroom settings (Guzmán Johannessen, 2019), such an analysis would most likely need to take into account how different perspectives and voices in the classroom might enhance or challenge evaluations of historical events and what the ‘stories of history’ are intended to tell. In short, a fuller understanding of narrative-analytical interplay in genre subtypes could productively inform instructional planning, curriculum design, and assessment of students’ written texts as well as telling us more about what history is about.

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Transcript 1. Example text, extract from item E4 (see Table 2)

[Heading] Magellan and the first circumnavigation of the Earth (+REAC)	Stage: AbstractThe historical uniqueness acknowledged Attitudinal outcome: Magellan a persistent and competent person Material outcome: insecurity about the dangerous journey The historical uniqueness reinforced
Fernando Magellan was the person who led the sea expedition that first sailed around the world. (+REAC) (+NORM, +CAP; +TEN). But only 18 of the 265 sailors survived (-AFFECT) the long voyage. (+REAC);
[Subheading] No one had yet found the sea route west to Asia (+REAC)
Fernando Magellan (1480–1521) was a wealthy Portuguese navigator and warrior who had participated in voyages (+CAP) to India in the early 16th century. He also founded a Portuguese colony in the Moluccas (+CAP), or the Spice Islands as they were called. At the age of 40 he returned to Portugal. Now he had decided (mental process) to find the sea route west to the Spice Islands (+TEN). Magellan was convinced (mental process) that there was a passageway south of the American mainland. Among other things, he had knowledge of (+CAP) of secret Portuguese maps (+AFFECT) indicating that there would be a connection between the Atlantic and the Pacific Ocean in South America. But because the Portuguese were not interested in the plan, Magellan was forced to turn to King Charles V, who was the ruler of Spain (+TEN)	Stage: BackgroundMagellan is established as the main character; Attitudinal outcome: Magellan is an able and experienced personIntrusion of Magellan’s thoughts: the reader is invited to ‘take part’ in his plans, Magellan’s persistence is highlighted (attitudinal outcome)Material outcome: ‘secrecy’ invoking excitement Attitudinal outcome: Magellan persists when encountering obstacles
Spain was interested in expanding its trade relations to find a sea route west from its colonies in South America to Asia.
[Subheading] A deadly (-AFFECT) journey On 20 September 1519, Magellan departed from Spain with five small ships. Like many other commanders (+CAP), Magellan kept the true objective of the trip a secret to his crew members, because he thought (mental process) they would then not dare to join the trip (-AFFECT).	Material outcome: Dangers of the journeyStage: Record of events Succeeding events.The stage shift is signalled by circumstances of time/place, often as marked themes (these have been highlighted in the text). Focus on Magellan as a resourceful leader of the expedition, and the reader is invited to share his thoughts (intruded via mental processes). The perils of the voyage are frequently noted (coded with -AFFECT), adding to Magellan’s capacity as a leader.
Finally, the vessels arrived at Patagonia (southern South America) where the crew wintered. Here, Magellan had to fight with force (-AFFECT) a rebellion from one of his subordinate captains (-AFFECT). [Parts of text omitted]
On 6 March 1521, they reached the Marianas. After that, the trip went to the Philippines. On the island of Cebu, Magellan established trade relations (+CAP) with the islanders and converted some chiefs to Christianity (+CAP). To help (+PROP) the ruler of Cebu, Magellan offered (+PROP) to attack the neighbouring island of Mactan. On 27 April 1521, he made landfall on the island of Mactan with 48 men where they met 1,500 people (+CAP). Magellan was killed after a warrior among the islanders hit him with a spear in his chest (-AFFECT).	Attitudinal outcome: Magellan is presented as resolute, helpful, and competent, who also fights against overwhelming odds.
	Material outcome (-AFFECT); dramatic events are detailed
[Subheading] The expedition succeeded but at a high price (-AFFECT)	Material outcome: Dangers reinforced
Of Magellan’s fleet of five ships, only the ship Victoria reached past the southern tip of Africa and back home to Spain in 1522. By then the expedition had been going on for almost three years. Of Magellan’s original crew of 265, only 18 completed (-AFFECT) the first world circumnavigation of the Earth and returned to Spain. (+REAC)	The final paragraph contains fewer narrative elements (since the ‘protagonist’ has died). The danger of the journey is reiterated. The text ends with a reinforcement of historical uniqueness

Transcript 2. Historical recount type 2, extract from item E5

Vasco da Gama was a Portuguese seafarer who went down in history as the first person to travel by sea from Europe to Asia (+REAC) [parts of the text omitted]	Abstract The historical uniqueness of the event is acknowledged
Da Gama had not intended to follow the coast of Africa, instead he planned to sail straight across the Atlantic and then steer towards Cape of Good Hope.	Record of eventsMental processes (intended, planned) intruding participants’ thoughts
The Europeans had thus established a connection at sea with India. Vasco da Gama’s accomplishment was to have enormous significance for European trade with Asia (+VAL)	CommentThe historical implications of the event is acknowledged
During the voyage, severe storms were encountered. [text continues]	Record of events (continued)

Transcript 3. Extract from item F2

The 16th century was the century of exploration. European adventurers sailed into the unknown. Their main goal was to get rich—fast. In distant lands, they plundered tons of gold and silver. And they made fortunes on furs, flowers, and exotic spices. The sailors became businessmen, and the businessmen became immensely rich. Their methods were theft, fraud, and murder. Pirates, kings, and conquerors laid the foundation for capitalism. This was the era of plunder.

Transcript 4. Extract from item T1

Christopher Columbus was born in the Italian port city of Genoa in 1451. In many ways, he can be seen as typical of the Renaissance, with its optimism and willingness to invest in new ideas. In the late 15th and early 16th centuries, he and other European seafarers made a series of voyages of discovery that opened new routes for trade across the seas. Europe came to control these new trade routes for many hundreds of years.

Columbus wanted to sail westward from Europe to find a sea route to India and China. In this way, he was hoping to open new trade routes across the seas.

With the explorations, European colonialism begins, that is, a country subjugates other countries and territories. The first thing Columbus did when he landed on an island in the Caribbean was to take possession of the island in the name of Spain. Columbus did not think, even for one second, that the islanders themselves might have any right to the island where they lived

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. Unfortunately, from the point of view represented by my analytical framework, Martin and White (2005) use the word ‘unique’ to characterize the valuation (VAL) category. It should be noted that, in the present paper, ‘uniqueness’ is tied to REAC, not to VAL.